Menu Icon

Debt Rattle September 27 2025

Sep 272025
 
 September 27, 2025  Posted by at 9:50 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


René Magritte The song of the storm 1937

 

• Martyr or Liar? Comey Indicted on Two Counts (Turley)
• Former FBI Director James Comey Indicted on Three Counts (CTH)
• Days of Judgment (James Howard Kunstler)
• Yet Again, Deep State Attacks DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
• Leaked Memo Reveals FBI Deployed A Stunning 274 Agents On J6 (ZH)
• Kiev False-Flag Provocation Could Lead To World War 3 – Zakharova (RT)
• Kremlin Slams ‘Reckless’ NATO Threats To Shoot Down Russian Planes (RT)
• EU Moves To Bypass Hungary’s Veto On Russia Sanctions (RT)
• Crazy Idea On How To Steal Russia’s Assets: Make EU Taxpayers Pay For It (MoA)
• Kallas Insists US Shouldn’t Offload Ukraine On EU (RT)
• West Invented The ‘Russian Threat’ – And Kept It For 500 Years (Bordachev)
• Gaza Deal Near – Trump (RT)
• He Destroyed A Country and Half A Million Lives and Got Five Years (Fetouri)
• Elon Musk Says Charlie Kirk Was Shot From The Rear (Paul Craig Roberts)

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I said yesterday, this will be a difffiult case to bring. They are all in it together, and all for one, one for all etc. But there’s a weakness to that too. The rats may try to be first to leave the ship if they expect rain. Several sources now say McCabe may turn on Comey, on whose orders he leaked.

“This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks.”

“He is also a sophisticated player. Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “bring it on” and let’s go to trial. While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotape may be too confident.”

• Martyr or Liar? Comey Indicted on Two Counts (Turley)

Yesterday, James Comey became the first former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be indicted for a federal crime. That is likely the only fact upon which you will receive anything close to agreement in the country. For some, the two-count indictment is a long-overdue accountability for a man who pushed through the now-debunked Russian collusion investigation. For others, it is another abuse on President Donald Trump’s revenge tour. There are legitimate concerns about the targeting of a political critic of the President, particularly after he publicly complained just days ago that Attorney General Pam Bondi was not indicting Comey and others.

However, Comey is hardly the pristine model of “ethical leadership” that he described in his book. Putting aside his critical role in the Russian collusion investigation, Comey tossed aside even the pretense of ethics after Trump fired him. The Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, issued a scathing report that found Comey was a leaker and had violated FBI policy in his handling of FBI memos. On his way out of the Bureau, Comey stole FBI materials, including those containing the “code name and true identity” of a sensitive source. While he did not find that he disclosed the classified information, Horowitz found that Comey took “the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive investigative information, obtained during the course of FBI employment, in order to achieve a personally desired outcome.”

He further added that Comey “set a dangerous example for the over 35,000 current FBI employees—and the many thousands of more former FBI employees—who similarly have access to or knowledge of non-public information.” Comey later admitted that he asked his friend, Columbia Law Professor Daniel Richman, to leak information from the documents to the New York Times. Comey’s close associate, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, stated that Comey did instruct him to leak information to the media. Comey denied that repeatedly under oath. James Baker, FBI general counsel and a close adviser to Comey, also told investigators that he was “under the belief” that he was “ultimately instructed and authorized to [provide information to the Times] by then FBI Director James Comey.”

That sets up a straightforward question: who is lying? It could also set up a bizarre scene of McCabe testifying against his friend. McCabe despises Trump as much as Comey, so he may prove to be an overtly hostile witness for the prosecutors. Washington will be glued to any such trial. The only thing more unnerving than the alleged targeting of a political critic in Washington is the prosecution of a leaker. This is a city that floats on a rolling sea of leaks. The Justice Department is notorious for leaks made with lethal effect against targets. Now the former FBI director will stand trial to see if he is a leaker and a liar. There is one individual who is likely to be watching with particular interest and perhaps satisfaction: former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

Comey is facing two counts of making false statements and obstructing a congressional proceeding. The first count under 18 U.S.C. 1001 (a)(2) is the exact charge that Comey engineered against Flynn. Comey gave a book tour where he thrilled audiences about how he secured a criminal charge against Flynn for making false statements. In one event, an audience cheered as Comey took credit for the controversial charge. He explained that what he did was not exactly proper. It was, he explained, “something we’ve, I probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation, a more organized administration…I thought, ‘It’s early enough, let’s just send a couple of guys over.’”

The actual agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that he intentionally lied about a meeting with Russian diplomats, but Comey and his investigators pushed for charges anyway. They drained Flynn of resources, threatened to indict his son, and ultimately secured a guilty plea. Now it will be Comey in the dock, facing a charge of making a false statement. He will do so as someone who has admitted to improperly removing FBI material and leaking information to the media. The odds still favor Comey. He will have a jury taken from a generally liberal, Democratic jury pool. He is also a sophisticated player. Perhaps that is why he issued a videotaped message saying effectively “bring it on” and let’s go to trial. While an improvement over Comey’s bizarre seashell messages, the videotape may be too confident.

Perjury or false statements can be challenging to prove, particularly when vague or nuanced language is used. This is neither vague nor nuanced. Comey repeatedly swore that he never asked anyone at the FBI to leak information. That is either true or it is not. Comey will continue to be vilified and lionized by different parts of the population. Yet, this is an ignoble moment that he helped bring about. Notably, this indictment comes 50 years after the only Attorney General was convicted of crimes (including false statements and obstruction). That was John Mitchell after the Watergate scandal. Now the man who bragged about nailing Michael Flynn will face the same false statement charge. The man who celebrated the charging of Donald Trump (including obstruction-related charges) will face his own obstruction charge. Whether karma or lawfare, Comey will now have his day in court.

Read more …

“This count could open the door to public testimony by McCabe, Rice, Mook, Brennan and even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself as to Comey’s knowledge; each was a first-hand witness.”

• Former FBI Director James Comey Indicted on Three Counts (CTH)

Newly appointed U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, from the Eastern District of Viginia, has released a criminal indictment of former FBI Director James Comey . The indictment alleges three counts. Counts one and two are ‘false statements’ to congress on September 30, 2020, [18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2)] and count three is ‘obstruction of a federal proceeding’ stemming from the same testimony. [18U.S.C. § 1505] The first false statement charge surrounds Hillary Clinton’s “approval of a plan concerning” Donald Trump and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

COUNT #1 – James Comey claimed he could not remember being made aware of the Trump-Russia collusion plan, and there is ample evidence from his own previous public statements, from public and sworn statements by former CIA Director John Brennan, from former statements by officials in the January 5, 2017, meeting memorialized by Susan Rice, from statements that remain sealed as recounted by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and from statements under oath by the former Clinton campaign team -including campaign manager Robby Mook- that James Comey was well aware of the plan. While this first count is based on the tenuous “I don’t remember” aspect, this count holds more material benefit than simply Comey’s recollection.

This count could open the door to public testimony by McCabe, Rice, Mook, Brennan and even Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton herself as to Comey’s knowledge; each was a first-hand witness. This first count holds strong material value in a public trial regardless of the outcome. This first count establishes the baseline for USAO Lindsey Halligan to bring all material witnesses into court and publicly put them on record outlining the Trump-Russia collusion scheme. You could say, I hope the intent is not just to incarcerate Comey per se’ – but rather to use what Comey represents to indict the entire enterprise around him. The facts behind Count #1 make this possible. Let’s all hope this strategic intent unfolds.

Count #2, involves James Comey falsely testify he did not direct former his FBI Special Government Employee (SGE) Daniel Richman to leak information to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt. This second count is easily evidenced through the prior investigation of Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and all prior witness statements therein. Again, that includes testimony to Horowitz given by former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Additionally, the second count is evidenced by the direct testimony of Daniel Richman himself, who was hired by James Comey and given special access privileges to classified information systems. Richman was likely a grand jury witness during the assembly of the case against Comey. Count #2 is the easiest to prove beyond any reasonable doubt.

BIG PICTURE – One of the frustrations felt by many people who have researched or followed the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense, is the lack of accountability for the internal actors who operated within a highly weaponized DOJ and FBI system. Perhaps this indictment is the first step in holding those to account. I am often asked about why the second term cabinet members of President Trump do not take action. My response is consistent. They refuse to acknowledge or assert the corruption within the institutions they lead. They are fraught with fear. The administration of President Donald Trump does not have the same institutional operations in place that Joe Biden visibly deployed post January 6, 2021.

President Barack Obama spent eight years working with Attorney General Eric Holder, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Deputy AG Sally Yates, former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and former FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker, on a process of weaponizing the Dept of Justice and FBI. All of the agents and attorneys within the Obama network, in addition to their private sector media and Lawfare partners, spent over a decade building out their ideological targeting tools. Bondi, Patel and to a lesser extent Bongino, spent a ridiculous amount of time denying the institutional constructs that sit beneath them. Still, to this day, they do not publicly admit the internal challenge with each organization. All institutional change first requires a public admission of the problem.

Main Justice and FBI remain -to this day- in private acceptance but public denial of the problem. In essence they are stuck in a pretending loop. Each day that follows grows the Gordian knot their denial & fear creates. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy; an outcome born of both fear and inability. Those who created the weaponized institutions are heavily reliant upon the retention of pretense. We the people, are continually witnessing this dynamic and frustrated at the lack of accountability. Yet even within that frustrated annoyance, too few boldly outline exactly how comprehensively corrupt the institutions are – by former design. Pam Bondi and Kash Patel are afraid of the organizations they lead. Their fear stems from a desire to be viewed as effective, and yet their ineffectiveness at correcting the problem is driven by their fear. Thus, the loop.

Yes, Main Justice and the FBI can change the dynamic, but it starts -as all massive institutional reform efforts must- with a seismic release of sunlight upon the toxic corruption that sits at their feet. As long as Pam Bondi and Kash Patel continue to maintain a pretense of top-down control, the embedded system operators will continue undermining them and acting maliciously. The effort to hold James Comey to account is highlighting just how corrupt THEIR SYSTEM is. It is not accidental that President Trump needed to shake them up and change this dynamic with the very public appointment of Lindsey Halligan.

How do Bondi and Patel stop entwining the knot and finally cut it? Well, that begins with sunlight, firings, investigations and criminal indictments of former officials AND current holdovers inside their agencies. In essence, they must purposefully and righteously ‘turn the tables‘ in their own temples. Perhaps the indictment of James Comey will finally begin the process.

Read more …

“If you’re want a friend in DC, get a dog. We’re coming for you.” —Dan Bongino, Deputy Director, FBI

• Days of Judgment (James Howard Kunstler)

You better believe Martha Stewart baked a cake last night — the lovely Gâteau Opéra perhaps? — when she got the news that the ham sandwich known as James Comey got indicted by a federal grand jury twenty-two years after that same ham sandwich indicted the goddess of hearth and home for lying to the FBI and the SEC over a trumped-up insider-trading rap, and sent her to federal prison for a five-month stretch plus five additional months of confined home-making and two years of supervised redecorating.

Mr. Comey’s indictment is probably just the opening salvo in what will be a barrage of indictments coming down against government officials who used their powers-under-law to harass, disable, cancel, dis-bar, bankrupt, persecute and ruin thousands of their fellow citizens, including especially the 45th president and the people who worked for him.

Jim Comey was the engine who pulled the choo-choo train of seditious fakery known as RussiaGate (Donald Trump colluding with Vladimir Putin) into America’s public life, which then expanded into the years-long ass-covering operations of the Mueller Investigation, then Impeachments One and Two, then the J-6 FBI-engineered “insurrection,” then Nancy Pelosi’s Congressional J-6 committee gong show, and then the four various fugazi prosecutions against Mr. Trump in 2024 designed to derail his re-run for office bankrupt his family, and stuff him in prison for the rest of his life.

Mr. Comey and his associates must be astounded that none of that worked. It really was a mighty organized criminal endeavor. And, as such, it stands to be prosecutable under the RICO statutes, which means that these current two charges against Mr. Comey should be a coming attraction of much more to come against him and many other familiar characters, possibly including his successor as FBI Director Christopher Wray. (The Blaze reports overnight that the FBI deployed roughly 275 plainclothes agents into the J-6 protest crowd at the US Capitol, as opposed to the 26 agents that Mr. Wray testified about to Congress.)

The smuggery of this gang in the years since all this business started in 2016 has also been out of this world. Mr. Comey dropped one rancid video after another either making threats or sanctimoniously declaring his sainthood, as if he expected the dreadful day would never come that he might face charges. Likewise, former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe ran his mouth all over CNN for years, former CIA Director John Brennan spun fibs on MSNBC, while FBI RussiaGate straw-boss Peter Strzok rode shotgun regularly with fake news confabulator Rachel Maddow. All of it was designed to bamboozle the public, and it worked!

You can expect more than one RICO case to come because these crimes against our country occurred in many discrete episodes of organized misconduct over many years. The RussiaGate op involving Comey, Brennan, Hillary, Obama, Biden, et al., was quite separate from Adam Schiff’s orchestrated seditious Impeachment #1 featuring CIA mole Eric Ciaramella, Col. Alexander Vindman, and ICIG Michael Atkinson. As was the activity of the Mueller group actually supervised by Andrew Weissmann (because Robert Mueller was secretly non compos mentis). As were the J-6 shenanigans of Mr. Wray’s FBI, including the DNC Pipe Bomb sideshow.

As were the Lawfare exploits of Norm Eisen and Mary McCord conniving with “Joe Biden’s” White House to arrange the Trump prosecutions by DA Alvin Bragg and AG Letitia James in New York and DA Fani Willis in Fulton County, GA. As were the dark deeds of Merrick Garland and his Special Counsels Jake Smith, David Weiss, and Robert Hur. As were the 2020 and 2022 election-rigging capers of Marc Elias & Company. As were whatever peculiar directives were ordered by Alejandro Mayorkas to throw the US borders wide open. As was the “autopen” abuse by the White House staff and their cover-up of “Joe Biden’s” mental decline.

Read more …

“It is certainly true that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have refused to look internally; and it is also true that DNI Tulsi Gabbard has spent much of her focus time looking internally.”

• Yet Again, Deep State Attacks DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)

It is difficult not to notice the strategy of how certain Trump administration officials are targeted. Any cabinet member that looks inward to reveal the status of corrupt activity within the information silo itself becomes a target. Cabinet officials who focus externally, meaning the majority of their effort looks outside government, are seemingly left alone. HHS Secretary RFK Jr and Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, are examples of those receiving the worst ideological targeting from operations within HHS and the Intelligence Community respectively. Conversely, CIA Director John Ratcliffe faces almost no scrutiny or targeting by the Intelligence Community as the silo operators frame narratives almost exclusively against DNI Gabbard.

The latest effort surfaces as embeds within Main Justice and the CIA frame a storyline that Tulsi Gabbard’s action in removing the security clearances of 37 current and former officials, has now resulted in those same officials being incapable of testifying against former CIA Director John Brennan (and others). The premise of the narrative is ridiculous. If we are to accept some current or former IC officials are willing to testify against Brennan (or others), regardless of whether Tulsi Gabbard has revoked their security clearances, their retroactive knowledge is still pertinent. They are completely free to give statements and testimony based on their prior conduct. What the leakers to Axios and the New York Times are trying to establish, is groundwork for the removal of Tulsi Gabbard.

This stops her objective of investigating internal corruption. I suspect most of the people trying desperately to undermine Gabbard are from within the CIA Directorate of Analysis, or at least in alignment with the directorate’s agenda. The narrative’s author, Marc Caputo, claims AG Pam Bondi is hampered in her effort to criminally indict John Brennan because the witnesses Main Justice would use have lost their security clearances. Again, the game of leveraging internecine friendships in/around the office of Trump becomes an overlay. It is certainly true that AG Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel have refused to look internally; and it is also true that DNI Tulsi Gabbard has spent much of her focus time looking internally. Bondi and Patel continue the preferred game of institutional blame-casting in Main Justice. Meanwhile, Gabbard is busy focused on cleaning up her IC house.

The Fourth Branch embeds do not fear the approach of Bondi/Patel, but the Fourth Branch embeds are petrified by the approach of Tulsi Gabbard. That reality underpins the baseline of opposition against the Director of National Intelligence. As the dynamic unfolds, CIA Director John Ratcliffe is certainly not corrupt; however, nor is he brave. Director Ratcliffe is willing to let Director Gabbard clean up his house, and then he takes credit for the reform. As the weeks unfold into months, this is becoming increasingly obvious.

Mark Zaid is the current anti-Trump Lawfare operative likely seeding the narrative to Axios/New York Times. “Mark Zaid, a Trump administration critic who represents six of the intelligence professionals whose clearances were revoked, said administration officials fretting about the Brennan case have “valid concerns.” “This seems to be, as usual, an unforced error by Trump administration officials who don’t think things through in the long game in favor of a quick-pass completion,” he said. “If I were the defense counsel [for Brennan], I would raise the revocation in an attempt to undermine the credibility of the witnesses.”

Mark Zaid knows the game-changing process that DNI Tulsi Gabbard is using. Gabbard is directly going into each IC agency to review and retrieve information. When she finds something that connects to the overall plots being used by the Fourth Branch, the DNI takes that information directly to President Trump who subsequently declassifies it and then she releases it. Zaid and the Deep State operatives he represents, want to stop Tulsi Gabbard with urgency. They are throwing every available IC narrative into the media flow in the hope that something stops Tulsi’s effectiveness.

Read more …

And then lie about it 1,000 times…

• Leaked Memo Reveals FBI Deployed A Stunning 274 Agents On J6 (ZH)

The FBI deployed nearly 300 plainclothes agents to the US Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 riot, in an effort that became so chaotic it caused an internal schism within the agency that led many rank-and-file at the bureau that core competencies had been lost to “wokeness,” and that employees had become “pawns in a political war,” according to an after-action report hidden from the public for over four years until it was obtained by Just the News. Anonymous complaints were sent to the after-action team by scores of FBI agents and other personnel – many from the bureau’s premier Washington field office (WFO) – detailing how agents were sent into a dangerous situation without proper safety equipment or even the ability to identify themselves as armed officers to other police agencies.

Most common among the complaints was that under former directors Chris Wray and just-indicted James Comey, the bureau had become infected with political bias and liberal ideology that treated the Trump-supporting Jan. 6 protesters much differently from Black Lives Matter rioters from the summer of 2020. “The FBI should make clear to its personnel and the public that, despite its obvious political bias, it ultimately still takes its mission and priorities seriously,” wrote one employee. “It should equally and aggressively investigate criminal activity regardless of the offenders’ perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations; and it should equally and aggressively protect all Americans regardless of perceived race, political affiliations, or motivations.”

The agent suggested that leaders “identify viable exit options for FBI personnel who no longer feel it is legally or morally acceptable to support a federal law enforcement and intelligence agency motivated by political bias.” Another agent suggested that the problem was widespread throughout the FBI. “Currently, the US Attorneys office is dictating what it is that gets investigated. This is a dangerous precedent because we can barely get them to prosecute investigations that clearly meet thresholds needed for Federal prosecutions,” the agent wrote. “However, their willingness to conduct a search warrant on someone’s life for a misdemeanor seems ridiculous. It is unreasonable for the FBI to conduct investigations involving misdemeanor violations at a federal level… it is not our role.”

Several employees directly mentioned the Washington Field Office (WFO) and its culture. “WFO is a hopelessly broken office that’s more concerned about wearing masks and recruiting preferred racial/sexual groups than catching actual bad guys,” wrote one worker. “I wish you all would pay more attention to our safety than what type of masks we wear. If you are going to deploy us to a riot situation, then give us the proper damn safety equipment–helmet, face shield, protective clothing–and training!” wrote another. In total, the after-action feedback spanned 50 pages, which were located by current FBI Director Kash Patel’s office and turned over to the House Judiciary Committed and its subcommittee

As Just the News notes further; the document has proven a bombshell to lawmakers, revealing for the first time that the FBI had a total of 274 agents deployed to the Capitol in plainclothes and with guns but no clear safety gear of way to be recognized by other law enforcement agencies working in the chaos of the riot. Wray, Patel’s predecessor, steadfastly refused to tell Congress how many if any agents went to the Capitol that day. And a prior DOJ Inspector General Report did not divulge the number, referring only to a SWAT team the bureau sent into the Capitol and having more than two dozen informants in the crowd. The existence of mass FBI agents at the Capitol on Jan. 6 could also be a problem in many of the cases that were subsequently brought in court. If agents were witnesses at the Capitol and did not disclose it in the subsequent affidavits during prosecutions it could create grounds for defendants to appeal.

The document also reveals for the first time that there were widespread concerns for years inside the bureau – sentiments that boiled over after the FBI began sending SWAT teams to arrest Jan. 6 participants on misdemeanor charges – that the FBI had become biased in favor of liberals and against conservatives. Despite the pre-existing report, Wray rejected that notion in testimony before Congress. “The idea that I’m biased against conservatives seems somewhat insane to me, given my own personal background,” Wray told Congress in 2023. “I have found almost invariably, the people screaming the loudest about the politicization of the FBI are themselves the most political, and more often than not, making claims of politicization to advance their own views or goals, and they often don’t know the facts or are choosing to ignore them,” Wray added in an episode of the podcast “FBI Retired Case File Review” that aired the same year.

Read more …

MO: take a downed Russia drone, repair it, use it to attack Europe. Everyone will think Russia did it.

• Kiev False-Flag Provocation Could Lead To World War 3 – Zakharova (RT)

Ukraine is planning a possible false-flag operation in Romania or Poland that could escalate into a third world war, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. In a Telegram post on Friday, she pointed to reports in Hungarian media alleging that Kiev intends to stage acts of sabotage in neighboring NATO countries and place responsibility on Moscow. ”Europe has never been so close to the outbreak of World War 3 in modern history,” Zakharova wrote. According to the information available, the Kiev regime’s plan is to repair several downed or intercepted Russian UAVs, fit them with lethal warheads, and – controlled by Ukrainian specialists – send them disguised as “Russian drones” to major NATO transport hubs in Poland and Romania, Zakharova continued.

At the same time, they would run a disinformation campaign across Europe to pin the blame on Moscow and thereby try to provoke an armed conflict between the Russian Federation and NATO, she added. In order to carry out this alleged provocation, Russian-made ‘Geran’ drones were reportedly delivered on September 16 to the Yavorov training ground in western Ukraine, which hosts the International Center for Peacekeeping and Security of the Hetman Petro Sagaidachny National Academy. The UAVs had reportedly earlier been repaired at the LORTA plant in Lviv.

Zakharova cited Hungarian journalists as saying that the reason for these actions by Vladimir Zelensky is straightforward: the Ukrainian armed forces are suffering a crushing defeat. The collapse of the army, they argued, is no longer limited to the tactical level but has taken on a strategic dimension. If all this is confirmed, it means that Europe has never been so close to the start of World War 3, Zakharova concluded.

Read more …

You can bet the Russian pilots are under strict orders NOT to breach protocol.

• Kremlin Slams ‘Reckless’ NATO Threats To Shoot Down Russian Planes (RT)

Threats by NATO member states to shoot down Russian warplanes are “reckless and irresponsible,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov has said. He insisted that no hard evidence has been presented to back up allegations that Russian fighter jets violated bloc members’ airspace. Earlier this month, Poland alleged that multiple Russian drones had entered its territory. Estonia made similar claims of airspace violations last Friday, requesting urgent consultations with fellow NATO member states. Moscow has denied any breaches of the military bloc’s airspace. Responding to the Estonia claim, the Russian Defense Ministry said three MiG-31s were conducting a routine flight from Karelia Region, east of Finland, to an airfield in Kaliningrad Region, a Russian exclave bordering Poland and Lithuania, and that they strictly flew over neutral waters of the Baltic Sea.

When asked to comment on a report by Bloomberg, in which Western diplomats were cited as threatening to shoot down intruding Russian warplanes, Peskov said on Friday that “this is a very reckless and irresponsible statement.” “Allegations against Russia that its warplanes have violated someone’s airspace are groundless,” the official said, noting that “no credible evidence has been produced” to corroborate the claims. The Bloomberg report cited anonymous officials as claiming that earlier this week, British, French, and German representatives had held a closed-door meeting with Russian officials in Moscow. According to the publication, the Western diplomats warned that NATO was prepared to shoot down Russian warplanes in the event of airspace violations.

Earlier this week, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he would not rule out such a scenario, but that decisions are made strictly on a case-by-case basis. In an interview with France’s RTL radio station on Thursday, Moscow’s ambassador to Paris, Aleksey Meshkov, cautioned that such an incident would trigger a “war” between NATO and Russia.

Read more …

Democracy and sunlight. This sort of thing always reminds me of Groucho: ‘These are my principles, and if you don’t like them, well, I have others’.

• EU Moves To Bypass Hungary’s Veto On Russia Sanctions (RT)

The European Commission has proposed extending sanctions against Russia by qualified majority rather than unanimity in order to prevent Hungary from blocking them, Politico reported on Friday, citing an EC document.EU diplomats are due to discuss the proposal and a new sanctions package later on Friday, the outlet said. Currently, Brussels renews anti-Russian sanctions every six months with unanimous approval. Hungary has consistently opposed the bloc’s unconditional support for Kiev, favoring peace talks over continued military aid, and has repeatedly used its veto to block EU financial and military assistance. Under the Commission’s plan, only a qualified majority would be needed to extend the restrictions, curbing Budapest’s ability to wield its veto and demand concessions such as releasing frozen Russian assets.

The outlet said that ahead of Friday’s meeting of EU permanent representatives, the Commission also outlined a plan to provide Ukraine with a €140 billion loan backed by frozen Russian central bank assets, to be disbursed in tranches for defense and budget support. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz endorsed the idea this week, but said the funds should go solely to pay for military equipment and only be repaid when Russia compensates Kiev for damages. Earlier this month, the Commission floated a proposal to use Russian assets to back a reparation loan to Ukraine, repayable only if Kiev receives “compensation” from Moscow.

Reuters earlier put the plan at €130 billion, describing it as a “reparations credit” replacing Moscow assets with zero-coupon bonds issued by the Commission, guaranteed by all EU states or a coalition of willing countries. Diplomats for the bloc are expected to debate these initiatives alongside a 19th sanctions package. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the measures would target Russian banks, liquefied natural gas, the Mir payment system and vessels in what Brussels calls Moscow’s “shadow fleet.” Russia, which has denounced Western sanctions as “illegal,” has warned that any attempt to seize or redirect its assets would deliver a “very serious blow” to the international financial system and has vowed to retaliate.

Read more …

“If countries see that central bank money can disappear when European politicians see fit, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone.”

• Crazy Idea On How To Steal Russia’s Assets: Make EU Taxpayers Pay For It (MoA)

The war hawks have long tried to steal Russian assets held in West to then use the money to finance the proxy war against Russia. The sums involved are serious: “Nearly three years after the start of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Belgium holds €258 billion in frozen or immobilised Russian assets. The General Administration of Treasury at the Ministry of Finance confirmed the figures on Wednesday to La Libre and De Tijd.” Some of these assets belong to institutions not sanctioned by the European Union. Frozen assets amount to €65 billion, with an additional €193 billion in immobilised transactions, primarily from the Central Bank of Russia.”

The money is not really held by Belgium but by the Belgium company Euroclear which acts as depository for international central bank assets denominated in Euros. Currently the EU is confiscating the interest, not the principal, of that money to distribute it to Ukraine. That step is likely already illegal and Russia will certainly use the courts to get it back. There were also talks to invest the Russian assets in junk bonds with aim of achieving a higher yield:

“Euroclear chief executive Valérie Urbain told the Financial Times that European Union plans to raise additional revenue from frozen Russian assets by investing them in higher-risk securities would amount to “expropriation.” Urbain also warned that such a move could prompt “Russian retaliation in all sorts of forms,” as well as damage Euroclear’s reputation. The majority of Russian assets frozen after Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine are currently held at Euroclear. The E.U. has reportedly been discussing the possibility of transferring these assets to a special E.U.-administered fund that would make higher-risk investments. The goal is to generate greater returns to support Ukraine.”

That move was blocked as no one was ready to accept the potential liability for it. Not only Belgium, but also Germany and other fiscal conservative states, have warned that such a move would endanger their own assets. Russia has announced that it will retaliate against any confiscation of its money. It threatens to confiscate whatever European companies own or hold in Russia. Those companies would then have to sue their own governments for cover of their losses. Now a new idea has crept up. How it is supposed to work is not clear to me but it seems to have the support of the German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

In a Financial Times op-ed Merz claims (archived): “Germany has been, and remains, cautious on the issue of confiscating the Russian central bank’s assets that are frozen in Europe, and with good reason. There are not only questions of international law to consider, but also fundamental issues concerning the euro’s role as a global reserve currency. But this must not hold us back: we must consider how, by circumventing these problems, we can make these funds available for the defence of Ukraine. In my view a viable solution should now be developed whereby — without intervening in property rights — we can make available to Ukraine an interest-free loan of almost €140 billion in total. That loan would only be repaid once Russia has compensated Ukraine for the damage it has caused during this war. Until then, the Russian assets will remain frozen, as decided by the European Council. Such extensive assistance will require budgetary guarantees from member states. Those bilateral guarantees should, as soon as the next Multiannual Financial Framework is in place in 2028, be replaced by collateralisation under the EU’s long-term budget.”

What sounds like AI slop is not Merz’ own idea but a plan that had been proffered earlier by the EU commission. But no one seems to understands how its is different from an outright confiscation of those assets: “Frustration has been building in EU capitals around the lack of details surrounding the so-called reparations loan, which Commission President Ursula von der Leyen first pitched in her State of the European Union speech Sept. 10. The bulk of the Russian assets are held by the Brussels-based financial firm Euroclear and are invested in Western government bonds that have matured into cash. The cash is sitting in a deposit account with the European Central Bank.

The idea is for the EU to redirect the cash to Ukraine and “enter into a tailored debt contract with Euroclear at 0 percent interest,” according to the note. Euroclear holds €185 billion in cash balances linked to the Russian assets, a part of which will pay back a preexisting G7 loan to Ukraine. The remaining €140 billion will be paid out to Ukraine in tranches and used for “defense cooperation” as well as supporting Kyiv’s ordinary budget needs.” Reuters has more details on it: “To avoid seizing the Russian assets, the idea is to transfer the cash from Euroclear to a newly created Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) owned by EU governments, or G7 governments as well. In exchange, the European Commission would issue Euroclear with zero-coupon bonds guaranteed by the owners of the SPV.

The EU bonds would cover Euroclear’s risk against Russian litigation while the cash in the SPV could be invested more profitably than overnight deposits in the ECB and thus generate a higher return for Ukraine. Why would this scheme, as Merz say, ‘require budgetary guarantees from member states’? Doesn’t that mean that the tax-payers of those member state will eventually have to pay it? Who’s money is at risk when Russia wins its litigation? Who pays if something goes wrong? Some 62% of German voters disapprove (in German) Merz’ policies. Only a record low 35.5% says that he is right in what he is doing. In the fiscal conservative Germany any attempt to borrow more money for the war in Ukraine will further sink his and his party’s chances of ever being reelected.

Merz knows that the scheme has little chance to find unanimous EU approval. He plans to circumvent opposition to it: “I propose that, at the European Council at the end of October, we give the mandate to prepare this instrument in a legally secure manner. That decision should, ideally, be unanimous — failing that, it should be adopted by the large majority of member states who are firmly committed to Ukraine. We should also invite partners around the world that have frozen Russian assets to join the instrument. To this end, we will co-ordinate closely with our partners in the G7”. Luckily it is Belgium which has the last says in this. It is, naturally, opposing the scheme:

Speaking in the margins of the UN General Assembly, Mr De Wever said that Chancellor Merz’s proposal “will never happen”. The Belgian Prime Minister argues that seizing central bank assets of a third country would set a dangerous precedent “If countries see that central bank money can disappear when European politicians see fit, they might decide to withdraw their reserves from the eurozone.” De Wever added Chancellor Merz’s public statement regarding this is regrettable. “I’ve told everyone that I am happy to discuss this. But let’s talk and come up with something, rather than sharing an opinion on it every day. I find it quite frustrating.” It is, in the end, Russia’s money. Any attempt to seize is outright thievery. How long will it take for sane people to intervene and to shoot this idea down?

Read more …

Scared shitless that the US will distance itself from Kiev.

• Kallas Insists US Shouldn’t Offload Ukraine On EU (RT)

Brussels is not solely responsible for helping Ukraine end its conflict with Russia, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas told Politico on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York on Thursday. The comments follow US President Donald Trump’s recent apparent change of stance on Ukraine, after he suggested that Kiev, “with the support of the European Union,” was “in a position to fight and win.” Some observers saw the remark as Trump stepping back from the conflict after failing to make good on his pledge to end it quickly. “He was the one who promised to stop the killing,” Kallas said. “So it can’t be on us.”

After taking office in January, Trump engaged in brokering peace negotiations while suspending military aid to Kiev and refraining from imposing sanctions on Russia. He has insisted that the EU countries take greater responsibility for their own security, urging European NATO members to increase military spending to 5% of their GDP. Brussels’ top diplomat insisted that there is no NATO without the US, adding that America is one of the military bloc’s key members and any discussion of NATO’s role must reflect Washington’s responsibilities. The EU has faced challenges in financing long-term support for Ukraine, limited by constraints in its budgetary mechanisms and resistance from some members.

Kallas, a long-time Russia hawk, put forward an ambitious plan in March to mobilize new military aid for Ukraine worth €40 billion via EU member states. Several countries, including France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, resisted the proposal, wary of the formidable commitments. After weeks of negotiations, the package was scaled back to €5 billion for ammunition, underscoring both the limits of EU unity and the challenges Kallas faces in translating her hawkish stance into collective action. Russia has repeatedly accused the EU of undermining the peace efforts around Ukraine and militarizing in preparation for any conflict with Moscow. Moscow’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday that the EU and NATO have declared “an actual war” on Russia, accusing the West of orchestrating the Ukraine conflict.

Read more …

“The myth of the bogeyman from Moscow was born of cowardice and kept alive by greed..”

• West Invented The ‘Russian Threat’ – And Kept It For 500 Years (Bordachev)

In recent weeks, tensions between European political elites and Russia have flared once more. A drone incident in Poland, an alleged violation of Estonian airspace by Russian jets, and calls from Eastern European politicians to shoot down Russian aircraft all point to a deliberate effort at escalation. This sudden surge of provocation is less about Moscow and more about the EU’s own insecurity. With the United States steadily reducing its security guarantees, the bloc’s governments are grasping at their oldest weapon: the myth of the ‘Russian threat’.It is a myth that has lingered in the European imagination for over 500 years, and it tells us more about Western Europe’s cowardice and greed than about Russia itself

Two realities drive the EU’s current posture. First, Washington’s appetite for underwriting European defense is waning. Reports in Western media suggest that US officials recently told their European counterparts that direct military aid to Eastern Europe may soon be scaled back. For elites in the Baltics and former Soviet republics, this is a nightmare scenario. Their foreign policy has always revolved around one thing: provoking Russia to extract protection and resources from abroad.Second, the EU has no alternative strategy. Without US leadership, it cannot conceive of a foreign policy beyond confrontation with Moscow. Reviving the Russian bogeyman provides a convenient way to retain Washington’s attention – and money.

Yet the irony is obvious. Russia has no interest in punishing its smaller neighbors. Moscow does not seek revenge on the Baltics, Poland, or Finland for decades of anti-Russian rhetoric. Their importance in world affairs is negligible. But for their elites, clinging to the myth of Russian aggression has been the only foreign policy achievement of their independence. The roots of this myth lie not in the Cold War or the 19th century rivalry between empires, but in the late 15th century. Historians trace its emergence to the cowardice of the Baltic barons and the opportunism of German knights in Livonia and Prussia. In the 1480s, Poland’s kings considered sending these knights south to fight the expanding Ottoman Empire. The plan terrified them.

For centuries, they had lived comfortably in the Baltics, bullying local populations and skirmishing with Russian militias at little risk. Facing the Turks was another matter. The memory of Nicopolis – where Ottoman forces executed nearly all captured knights – was still fresh. Unwilling to face a real war, the Livonian and Prussian knights launched a propaganda campaign. Their aim was to convince the rest of Europe that Russia was as dangerous as, or even more dangerous than, the Turks. If successful, they could keep their privileges at home, avoid Ottoman swords, and secure papal approval to treat their border clashes with Russians as a holy war. The strategy worked. Rome granted indulgences and support, ensuring the knights could stay put while still enjoying the prestige of crusaders.

As historian Marina Bessudnova notes, the 1508 Livonian chronicle ‘The Wonderful Story of the Struggle of the Livonian Landgraves against the Russians and Tatars’ provided the finishing touches to this propaganda. Tellingly, the Baltic barons’ private letters contain no mention of a Russian threat. The danger was never real on the ground – only in the stories they sold to Europe. Thus, the myth was born: a fusion of fear, convenience, and profit. Over time, Western Europe, particularly France and England, absorbed it into a broader Russophobia – equal parts contempt and anxiety over a vast empire they could neither conquer nor ignore.

Read more …

I don’t think you can save Netanyahu anymore. Best you can do is to argue he is not Israel.

• Gaza Deal Near – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump announced on Friday that a deal on ending the war in Gaza is close, but without providing any details. His comments came just hours after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the UN General Assembly he would “finish the job” of eliminating Hamas in the enclave. “I think we have maybe a deal on Gaza, and very close to a deal on Gaza, it’s looking like we have a deal,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Friday. Trump and Netanyahu are planning to meet in Washington on Monday. ”I think it’s a deal that will get the hostages back. It’s going to be a deal that will end the war,” Trump added.

Earlier this week, Trump and senior US officials presented a 21-point peace plan to Arab and Islamic leaders, the president’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff said at the UNGA. The plan calls for a permanent ceasefire, the release of all hostages, new governance for Gaza without Hamas, and a phased Israeli withdrawal, according to media sources. ”I think it addresses Israeli concerns and, as well, the concerns of all the neighbors in the in the region,” Witkoff said. “And we’re hopeful, and I might say, even confident, that in the coming days, we’ll be able to announce some sort of breakthrough.”

Trump’s position on the future of Gaza has not been consistent. In March, Trump said that “nobody is expelling any Palestinians” from the enclave, but later in May, he reiterated his desire for the US to take over the territory and “make it a freedom zone,” urging residents to leave. However, ahead of Netanyahu’s UN speech on Friday, Trump said he would not allow the annexation of the occupied West Bank, rejecting calls from some far-right politicians in Israel who want to extend sovereignty over the area. “It’s not going to happen,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, adding: “There’s been enough. It’s time to stop now.” Netanyahu signed a controversial West Bank settlement expansion plan this month.

Read more …

“The former French president’s conviction is a rare glimpse of justice – but his true crime goes unpunished..”

• He Destroyed A Country and Half A Million Lives and Got Five Years (Fetouri)

Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy was found guilty and sentenced to five years in jail for campaign finance violations, a historic ruling in a case that has long captivated Parisian politics. The court concluded that Sarkozy had exceeded legal spending limits during his 2007 presidential election campaign, and engaged in a conspiracy to obscure the sources of illicit funds he received from Libya’s late leader Muammar Gaddafi, as various evidence has demonstrated. However, while the conviction targets money, it leaves untouched the far heavier human toll of his foreign policy decisions – from the 2011 Libya intervention to its cascade of wars, state collapse, and crises brought on by migration across the Mediterranean and Sahel. In other words, France’s courts can punish illicit euros, but fails to account for the blood spilled in the pursuit of regime change.

Earlier this year, while discussing the saga surrounding Sarkozy’s campaign funds, a source speaking to me anonymously, and corroborated by a former Libyan intelligence official, revealed for the first time that “a portion of the money reportedly came from Libyan intelligence, delivered across the Italian border by a female operative.” While the court did not definitively link these funds to Sarkozy’s campaign expenditures, the claims echo earlier allegations by Ziad Takieddine, who passed away in Beirut on September 23. He had maintained that he transported cash from Libyan officials to Paris. The murky trail of intermediaries underscores the complexity of the financial networks and how covert foreign influence can intersect with domestic politics, even when the legal system stops short of proving direct use.

The fallout from Sarkozy’s Libyan intervention extends far beyond financial scandals. By leading France – and later the entire NATO alliance – into the 2011 regime-change operation against Muammar Gaddafi, he helped dismantle Libya’s institutions, creating a vacuum that allowed jihadist networks to expand across the Sahel. Fourteen years on, Libya has yet to recover from that invasion. The resulting instability triggered waves of displacement, forcing thousands of migrants to risk crossing the Mediterranean in search of safety. What began as a “humanitarian intervention” became a cascade of unintended consequences: weakened states, regional insecurity, and a humanitarian crisis that Europe continues to grapple with more than a decade later. Sarkozy’s decisions illustrate how foreign policy choices can have profound, long-term effects reaching far beyond the immediate political or financial sphere.

Sarkozy’s Libyan gamble continues to reverberate across Africa, where resentment toward France has deepened amid coups, political instability, and ongoing foreign interventions. From Mali and Niger to Burkina Faso, anti-French sentiment has surged, fuelled by perceptions of neo-colonial arrogance and broken promises. At the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2023, Mali’s Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop recalled the 2011 UN Security Council authorization for NATO’s military intervention in Libya, noting that it went against the objections of African leaders and resulted in “consequences [that] have permanently destabilized this fraternal country as well as the entire region.”

The betrayal of Gaddafi, once considered a potential strategic ally, has become a symbol of Western leaders’ disregard for African sovereignty, illustrating how regime-change adventures can leave a continent grappling with the fallout for years. Sarkozy’s conviction for campaign finance violations, while significant in Paris, cannot erase the broader geopolitical upheaval his decisions unleashed – a reckoning with the enduring shadow of neo-colonial interference. Many believe French intelligence played a role in Gaddafi’s murder in order to cover up the campaign funding scandal.

Read more …

“I think all that we really know is that the official narrative is false.”

• Elon Musk Says Charlie Kirk Was Shot From The Rear (Paul Craig Roberts)

Much of what Musk says makes sense, but not the globalism part that the assassination of Kirk is a way of dividing us. We have been divided for decades by the teaching of critical race theory, aversive racism and by the DEI policy created by Blumrosen in the EEOC in the 1960s, by abortion, by the legalization of sexual perversity, by the feminist attack on men, and so on. Division has long existed and worsened. Musk’s “globalism” explanation is an effort to rationalize division that has long existed and grown. Liberal-left American professors had done a thorough job of creating division. It is all they are good for.

The globalism theory assumes that the US is the only obstacle to the WEA’s global management of the world. But of course there is Russia, China, and the rest of the world. As for division it is the neoconservatives that have the US aligned against Russia, China, Iran, India, and in Israel’s pocket. Perhaps it is Israel that is attaining world control.

As for forensic evidence, the front neck wound is too small to be an exit wound. Possibly it could be an exit wound of a small caliber such as .17 or .22. But it is most certainly not an exit wound of a powerful round. Moreover, Kirk’s right hand man says the surgeon said there is no exit wound and that the surgeon found the bullet inside Kirk’s neck. Musk did not give evidence for the trajectory he asserts of rear entry and front exit. Still no one has identified the caliber of the bullet. It clearly is not a 30-06 as the official narrative asserts. I find the video of the palm pistol shot more convincing, at least convincing enough to be investigated. Indeed, all explanations should be investigated.

As we already have multiple explanations of Kirk’s assassination, it reminds me of what James Jesus Angleton once told me. When the CIA pulls off an event it has a pre-packaged cover story that instantly becomes the explanation, and several more pre-packaged stories in reserve. If the first narrative wears thin, a couple more narratives are released. People then argue over which is correct and the focus is shifted off the question why the first narrative was wrong. I think all that we really know is that the official narrative is false. The important question is why is the FBI satisfied with a false narrative?

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 30 2025

Aug 302025
 
 August 30, 2025  Posted by at 9:52 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , ,  34 Responses »


John French Sloan Backyards, Greenwich Village 1926

 

• Zelensky May Slow Down Peace Process Due to Corruption – Jeffrey Sachs (Sp.)
• Zelensky Claims Ukraine ‘Security Guarantees’ Will Be Ready Next Week (RT)
• Ukraine Security Guarantees Only After Peace Deal – Moscow (RT)
• EU ‘Grasping For Straws’ With Ukraine Buffer Zone Plan – Politico (RT)
• Vance Accuses Politico of ‘Foreign Influence Operation’ Against Witkoff (RT)
• A Dark Theory For The Evening (Armchair Warlord)
• Von der Leyen Calls Putin A ‘Predator’ (RT)
• Kiev Restricts Mass Gatherings After Anti-Government Protests (RT)
• Trump Asks Congress To Cut Cash For Ukrainian Painters and Balkan Gays (RT)
• Fireworks Ensue During Cook Vs. Trump Courtroom Showdown (ZH)
• IC Leakers Target DNI Tulsi Gabbard Again (CTH)
• The CIA -vs- DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)
• Trump Closes De Minimis Loophole As Dark Chapter In Trade Ends (ZH)
• Trump’s Global Tariffs Ruled Illegal By Washington Appeals Court, But… (ZH)
• This May Be the Worst Media Gaslighting About Minneapolis Yet (Margolis)
• Russia-China: From The Memory of WWII to BRICS/SCO Synergy (Pepe Escobar)

 

 

https://twitter.com/RL9631/status/1961119941412749546

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1961583394669699542

RFK
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1961515566876742124

https://twitter.com/Chicago1Ray/status/1961079159020503373

 

 

 

 

“Zelenskyy is avoiding real steps toward resolving the conflict with Russia for a number of reasons [..] out of his personal belief or fear for his life or corruption or other motivations..”

• Zelensky May Slow Down Peace Process Due to Corruption – Jeffrey Sachs (Sp.)

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is avoiding real steps toward resolving the conflict with Russia for a number of reasons, including corruption, well-known US economist and director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University Jeffrey Sachs said. The interview happened ahead of the Eastern Economic Forum, which will be held in Vladivostok from September 3–6. The economist is going to participate in a session “UN Development Agenda Beyond 2030.” “Zelensky, for whatever reason, out of his personal belief or fear for his life or corruption or other motivations, does not even make one inch towards the reality of the settlement; the Europeans, [French President Emmanuel] Macron, [German Chancellor Friedrich] Merz and [UK Prime Minister Keir] Starmer, the same way,” Sachs said.

The economist noted that his intransigence had left many issues unresolved following the Alaska summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “So in this sense, the only thing that was clarified in Alaska is that the United States is not going to pay for the Ukraine war, but everything else remains unsettled,” he added. After meeting with Zelensky and European leaders in the White House and a phone call with Putin, Trump announced preparations for a meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, after which a trilateral meeting with his participation may take place.

Read more …

You’re losing. Defining ‘Security Guarantees’ is not up to you. Not much is.

• Zelensky Claims Ukraine ‘Security Guarantees’ Will Be Ready Next Week (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that a complete framework of “security guarantees” for Kiev in case of a ceasefire or peace deal with Russia will be ready as early as next week. In a Telegram post on Thursday, Zelensky said he had spoken with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, adding that they had “discussed the next diplomatic steps” to settle the conflict. “There has been a lot of talk about security guarantees. National security advisers are currently working on the development of each specific component, and next week the entire configuration will be on paper,” Zelensky added. According to the Ukrainian leader, Erdogan involved his defense minister in the process to examine “how Türkiye can help guarantee security, including in the Black Sea.”

Erdogan’s office confirmed the call, saying Ankara would continue efforts to secure a “lasting peace” and stood ready to contribute to Ukraine’s security once hostilities end. Last week, Ukrainian First Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kislitsa said Western officials were working on security guarantees, promising that a first draft would be prepared by the end of August. He stressed, however, that Kiev “is categorically against trading our land for peace,” although earlier media reports suggested that Ukraine could agree to concede territories to Moscow. This week, Politico reported that European leaders were eyeing a proposal for a 40km buffer zone between Russian and Ukrainian lines in a ceasefire scenario, potentially patrolled by Western troops. Another discussion reportedly revolved around involving a neutral third country to oversee the enforcement of a truce.

Russia has said it is not against the concept of security guarantees for Ukraine, but stressed that any framework must involve UN Security Council members. Moscow has categorically opposed the deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form, reiterating that it seeks to address the root causes of the conflict, including the bloc’s expansion toward Russian borders. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has also criticized Western plans to limit the number of guarantor states to key NATO countries, adding that “the options proposed by the ‘collective West’ are one-sided and clearly aimed at containing Russia.”

Read more …

“..secure Kiev’s role as a strategic provocateur on Russia’s borders.”

• Ukraine Security Guarantees Only After Peace Deal – Moscow (RT)

Security guarantees for Ukraine must be the result of a settlement of the conflict with Russia, not a precondition for negotiations, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Kiev has demanded security guarantees from its Western backers as a prerequisite to a peace deal. Moscow has not ruled out guarantees in principle, but opposes efforts to design them without Russia’s participation. At a press briefing on Friday, Zakharova said any guarantees must be based on an “understanding that takes into account the security interests of Russia.” She added that a settlement must ensure Ukraine’s demilitarization, denazification, neutral and non-nuclear status, and recognition of the territorial realities.

“It is necessary to understand that providing security guarantees is not a condition, but a result of a peaceful settlement based on eliminating the root causes of the conflict in Ukraine, which, in turn, will guarantee the security of our country,” she said. Zakharova criticized the Western proposals put forward so far, warning they would only “lead to destabilization.” “The options proposed by the Collective West are one-sided, built with the obvious expectation of containing Russia… they increase the risk of NATO being drawn into an armed conflict with our country,” she said, adding that they would “secure Kiev’s role as a strategic provocateur on Russia’s borders.”

Kiev earlier pushed for NATO membership as a security guarantee, but US President Donald Trump has ruled this out. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and his European backers have also called for “Article 5-like guarantees” obligating the US-led military bloc to act if Ukraine is attacked. European policymakers have also considered sending troops to Ukraine as peacekeepers and creating a buffer zone with Western patrols. Moscow has rejected the deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine, whether as peacekeepers or otherwise. Moscow and Kiev have held three rounds of talks in the past three months, leading to major prisoner swaps. While a breakthrough has not been reached, US envoy Steve Witkoff said this week that Washington hopes to settle the conflict by the end of 2025, citing a “peace proposal on the table” and ongoing contact with Russian and Ukrainian officials.

Read more …

NATO ‘peacekeepers’ in Ukriane doesn’t fly. But it would if they’re only in a DMZ buffer zone?

• EU ‘Grasping For Straws’ With Ukraine Buffer Zone Plan – Politico (RT)

European policymakers are considering the creation of a 40km “buffer zone” between Russian and Ukrainian forces as part of a ceasefire or peace deal in a “desperate” attempt to end the conflict, Politico reported on Thursday, citing sources. Under the plan, Western troops would take on a “dual role” – patrolling the demilitarized area and training Ukrainian soldiers, two unnamed diplomats claimed. France and Britain are expected to provide the bulk of the force, a move deemed unacceptable by Moscow. Paris and London are reportedly lobbying other NATO states for contributions, although few have publicly said they are ready to send troops to Ukraine. The outlet claimed the plan could have “historical significance,” with officials likening it to Germany’s partition during the Cold War.

“They’re grasping for straws,” Jim Townsend, a former Pentagon official, told the outlet, warning that a lightly staffed buffer zone would not deter Russia. The idea is one of several scenarios under discussion for a possible truce or post-conflict arrangement, according to five European diplomats cited by the outlet. However Western officials are divided over the eventual size of the zone and whether Kiev would accept it, since it would likely require it to agree to territorial concessions. Proposals also reportedly detail a range from 4,000 to as many as 60,000 troops. US President Donald Trump earlier said Washington would not deploy ground troops to Ukraine, but did not rule out other types of support.

Politico earlier reported that EU leaders have also floated the idea of involving a neutral third country to help enforce any ceasefire. Neither Russia nor Ukraine has commented on the report, although Moscow has consistently opposed any NATO troop presence in Ukraine, citing the bloc’s expansion towards Russian borders as one of the root causes of the conflict. At the same time, Russia has not ruled out security guarantees for Kiev from the West in principle.

Read more …

“..in his full remarks [British diplomat Jonathan Powell] dismissed the “snobbery in diplomacy” and explained at length why Witkoff was “exactly the kind” of independent negotiator who succeeds where others fail.”

• Vance Accuses Politico of ‘Foreign Influence Operation’ Against Witkoff (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance has accused Politico of running a “foreign influence operation” against special envoy Steve Witkoff, blasting the outlet’s reporting as “journalistic malpractice” for relying on anonymous officials while excluding on-the-record statements from senior figures who defended him. The article, published Friday by Politico correspondent Felicia Schwartz under the headline “’His inexperience shines through’: Steve Witkoff struggles to manage Russia as Trump peace envoy,” cited 13 anonymous American and foreign officials who alleged that Witkoff lacked diplomatic skill and had caused confusion in ongoing negotiations with Moscow. “This story from Politico is journalistic malpractice. But it’s more than that: it’s a foreign influence operation meant to hurt the administration and one of our most effective members,” Vance wrote on X.

The only people Politico mentioned by name were those actually defending Witkoff. Vance said Schwartz omitted his own full statement as well as quotes from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, former White House adviser Jared Kushner, and British diplomat Jonathan Powell. “The person who wrote this garbage… They have an agenda to blow up the president’s efforts to make peace, and they saw her as a useful vessel to launder garbage into the conversation, truth be damned,” Vance added. Powell, the UK’s former chief negotiator in Northern Ireland, was quoted briefly as saying Witkoff had “opened doors no one else could.” However, in his full remarks he dismissed the “snobbery in diplomacy” and explained at length why Witkoff was “exactly the kind” of independent negotiator who succeeds where others fail.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt also accused Politico of deliberately cherry-picking quotes to fit a narrative. Deputy Chief of Staff James Blair went further, calling the article “a foreign influence operation run through a German-controlled online media outlet.” Witkoff has led the Trump administration’s back-channel talks with Russia and held multiple meetings with President Vladimir Putin and other top officials as part of Washington’s efforts to negotiate an end to the Ukraine conflict. Politico also claimed, citing another anonymous “person familiar,” that the Russians in touch with Witkoff were allegedly “frustrated” by his supposed “inability to properly convey Putin’s messages and red lines to Trump.” Russian officials, however, have spoken warmly of him, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov previously saying “we are always glad to see Mr. Witkoff in Moscow,” and calling the meetings “important, meaningful, and very useful.”

Read more …

X thread.

“..discredit Ukrainian nationalism by the hands of the very ultranationalists who took their nation to war in the first place.”

• A Dark Theory For The Evening (Armchair Warlord)

Looking at developments lately, specifically: (1) the Ukrainian casualty leak showing an astronomical 1.7M KIA/MIA; and (2) the Ukrainian collapse north of Pokrovsk – I thought should revisit a dark thought I had a while ago, namely that, “maybe the killing itself is the point of all of this.”

I’ve said before that the Russians have fought an extraordinarily clean war in Ukraine, but it should be understood that there is a very legalistic shade on that assessment. They’ve killed very few civilians, and Ukrainian propagandists are perpetually beclowning themselves trying to pretend that the usual single-digit handful of injured civilians that accompany the latest attack using hundreds of standoff weapons fired into city centers (producing secondary explosions visible from outer space as military targets hidden among civilian infrastructure are destroyed with surgical precision) somehow constitute gEnOCiDe rather than some of the most well-controlled warfighting in the history of the business. There is another and far darker side to Russia’s “clean” war, however.

Let us consider the fate of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – legal combatants all, whom the Russians can and do target and kill without limit. I mentioned the casualty leak earlier, but I feel this needs to have a line drawn under it – one point seven million personnel killed or missing in action in the AFU, over the course of the war. 1.7 MILLION. Seven or eight percent of Ukraine’s prewar population, probably something like a quarter of the entire national cohort of military-aged males, dead or missing. Casualties on the scale of a genocide, sufficient to permanently cripple any postwar Ukrainian nation. Casualties multiple times that which I assessed two years ago as sufficient to shatter the AFU based on the experience of Nazi Germany.

This brings me to the Ukrainian collapse north of Pokrovsk two weeks ago, in which a run-of-the-mill Russian attack walked through twenty kilometers of Ukrainian defensive belts and into open country. The Ukrainian propagandists coped by whining about how the single most important front sector for the AFU had somehow “run out of infantry.” But did the Russians throw in a mobile reserve to collapse the front and chase the AFU back to the Dniper, despite doubtless knowing full well what was going on? No, they did not – they consolidated in the breach and awaited the inevitable, panicked Ukrainian counterattack, in which they would have the opportunity to destroy Ukraine’s remaining elite troops.

Which brings me to my conclusion. The Russians have had countless opportunities to make large advances in this war, especially recently – the Ukrainian front line is an absolute shambles and their “drone wall” tactic will falter against any serious attack. So ineffectual is the AFU that very few Russian moves at the front even face serious opposition these days, with most geolocations of Russian advances showing them already established in place and dealing with harassment by kill drones after having seized positions bloodlessly. The Russians have in fact consistently foregone breaking the front and taking swathes of ground in favor of killing the largest possible number of Ukrainian soldiers on the existing front line under the existing attritional combat dynamic.

This “tactical directive” held true even during the Battle of Sudzha-Korenevo, fought in prewar Russia. Rather than counterattacking aggressively to evict the AFU, the Russians saw the opportunity to kill gigantic numbers of Ukrainians in a trap the enemy wouldn’t be able to extract themselves from for ideological reasons, and they took it. That battle ended up being nine months of hideously lopsided butchery that broke the back of the AFU. All of this makes observing the war more than a little maddening, but it’s a consistent pattern of behavior that begs for explanation. So here’s my theory.

The Russian government has consistently sought to end the war via peace treaty with the existing Ukrainian government, not via regime change, outright conquest, or even killing enough of that government to find a more flexible interlocutor among the Maidanites. Putin apparently wants a treaty with Zelensky. The Russians have also consistently made demands of the Ukrainian government – and its NATO sponsors – that are absolute political nonstarters for the Maidan-era regime and which that regime, by its very nature, simply cannot accept. Russian language rights, Orthodox religious rights, demilitarization, large territorial concessions which would see the AFU surrender vast urban areas without a shot fired. And yet the Russians insist, and they’re going to continue killing Ukrainian soldiers at ever-more lopsided ratios until they get their way.

Which leads me to the brutal conclusion: Putin doesn’t want to see Ukraine conquered. He’s never publicly expressed any desire for that. The consistent Russian policy is instead to see Ukraine – a “free” and “independent” Ukraine, having come to this impasse of its own sovereign will – utterly humiliated. Putin wants to make Zelensky put on a suit, come groveling to the Kremlin, and sign a treaty that will see the Maidanite government surrender its arms, disgorge huge amounts of territory, and reverse every single anti-Russian policy position it ever had. Ukrainian nationalism will be discredited overnight by the hands of those very nationalists, and the economically irrelevant, demographically shattered rump state will be sucked back into Russia’s political orbit in a matter of days.

So of course the Russians are only advancing in the most leisurely way possible. Their goal is to place the Ukrainian government into a militarily untenable situation so as to force a flamboyantly humiliating peace treaty upon them that includes large territorial concessions beyond the line of control – the ultimate Ukrainian taboo – so as to discredit Ukrainian nationalism by the hands of the very ultranationalists who took their nation to war in the first place.

Read more …

“..the bloc had “plunged into a Russophobic frenzy, and its militarization is becoming uncontrolled.”

• Von der Leyen Calls Putin A ‘Predator’ (RT)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has escalated her anti-Russia rhetoric, calling President Vladimir Putin a “predator” and reciting NATO’s familiar talking point about a looming Russian threat to justify the EU’s push for accelerated militarization. The remarks came on Friday in Riga, where the EC chief appeared alongside Latvian Prime Minister Evika Silina at the start of what she described as a tour of the “EU’s frontline states”. The route includes Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Poland -all bordering Russia or Belarus- as well as Bulgaria and Romania. “Putin is a predator,” von der Leyen claimed, accusing his mysterious “proxies” of targeting European societies “for years with hybrid attacks, with cyberattacks.”

She went as far as to accuse Moscow of engaging in the “weaponization of migrants,” without providing specifics and omitting the bloc’s own controversial open-door policies, which have fueled internal backlash for over a decade. She argued that the alleged Russian threat warranted the EU’s rearmament plan. “So, as we strengthen Ukraine’s defence, we must also take greater responsibility for our own defence,” she said. In March, von der Leyen floated a plan to raise €800 billion ($934 billion) through debt and tax incentives to re-arm the EU. The European Council later approved a €150 billion borrowing mechanism to fund the initiative. Moscow has repeatedly condemned what it calls the West’s “reckless militarization,” while dismissing allegations of any intent to attack NATO or EU states as “nonsense.” Russian officials, including President Putin, have accused Western leaders of fearmongering to justify inflated military budgets and cover up economic failures.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov recently accused the EU of sliding into what he described as a “Fourth Reich,” saying the bloc had “plunged into a Russophobic frenzy, and its militarization is becoming uncontrolled.” After US President Donald Trump ruled out any prospect of NATO membership for Kiev, European backers of Ukraine shifted to discussing “Article 5-like guarantees.” Policymakers have also considered sending troops to Ukraine as peacekeepers and creating a buffer zone with Western patrols. Russia has rejected the deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine, in any form. Moscow insists that any peace settlement must ensure Ukraine’s demilitarization, denazification, neutral and non-nuclear status, and recognition of the territorial realities.

Read more …

You must ask Zelensky if you can protest Zelensky. Winning!

• Kiev Restricts Mass Gatherings After Anti-Government Protests (RT)

The Ukrainian authorities have introduced a requirement that all mass gatherings receive prior approval from the military, according to local media and an official. The move comes weeks after Vladimir Zelensky faced widespread protests over his attempt to curtail the independence of anti-corruption agencies. The restriction, attributed to security concerns, was reported this week based on a leaked instruction from Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko to senior officials. The document outlined a general regulation for mass gatherings under martial law and stated that in Kiev, organizers must obtain permission directly from the General Staff.

On Friday, Nikolay Kalashnik, the head of the Kiev Region administration, confirmed the policy in comments about a recent event – a small concert that he said sparked complaints from residents and had not been approved by the military. Last month, the Ukrainian parliament passed legislation placing the prosecutor general in charge of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), both previously independent watchdogs. The change was widely seen at home and abroad as an attempt by Zelensky to shield his allies from investigation.

Kiev’s explanation that the reform was needed to root out alleged Russian influence within the agencies failed to convince critics. The decision triggered mass protests reminiscent of anti-government demonstrations prior to the 2022 escalation of the conflict with Russia and prompted Western officials to cut some funding, reportedly warning of a full freeze in aid. The government reversed course under pressure. The controversy coincided with a decline in Zelensky’s approval ratings and renewed Western interest in potential successors. Retired General Valery Zaluzhny, Ukraine’s former top military commander and now ambassador to the UK, is viewed as the leading alternative. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, but he has remained in office under martial law, refusing to transfer power as required by Ukraine’s Constitution.

Read more …

“..$1.5 million to promote the artwork of Ukrainian women, $3.9 million to support LGBT communities in the western Balkans, and $24.6 million for “climate resilience” in Honduras..”

• Trump Asks Congress To Cut Cash For Ukrainian Painters and Balkan Gays (RT)

Art by Ukrainian women and LGBT organizations in the Balkans are among a series of projects funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) targeted for cancelation by the administration of US President Donald Trump, the New York Post has reported. A White House request to US lawmakers to rescind unwanted spending includes $3.2 billion allocated to USAID, which the administration has pledged to dismantle. The programs to be axed include $1.5 million to promote the artwork of Ukrainian women, $3.9 million to support LGBT communities in the western Balkans, and $24.6 million for “climate resilience” in Honduras, according to the report. nThe move followed a ruling by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals that lifted an injunction on Trump’s efforts, clearing the way for the request to proceed.

The Trump administration has accused USAID of furthering “woke” initiatives around the world instead of using taxpayer money on furthering national interests. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared an end to the “era of government-sanctioned inefficiency” when he confirmed in July the takeover of the agency’s mandate by his department. Trump ordered the crackdown on USAID just after taking office in January, claiming it was run by “radical lunatics.” Among the initiatives the White House marked as wasteful were the production of a “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion musical” in Ireland and a “transgender opera” in Peru, the manufacturing of “personalized” contraceptives for developing nations, and agriculture development in Afghanistan that the US concluded fueled illegal drug production. Many critics of the agency outside the country have accused it of serving as a regime change tool that covertly serves the agenda of US foreign policy.

Read more …

Her lawyers seem to argue that mortgage fraud has nothing to do with working at the Fed. You sure?

• Fireworks Ensue During Cook Vs. Trump Courtroom Showdown (ZH)

Update (1220ET): It was fireworks in federal court Friday morning as lawyers for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook squared off against the Trump administration after Trump fired her on Monday over mortgage malarkey. Cook (who was busted in 2024 for plagiarism and only got her job because Kamala Harris was the tiebreaker vote during her confirmation) responded by filing a lawsuit – asking a judge to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) which would allow her to keep her job, for now. The drama kicked off at 9:30 a.m. before U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb, where Cook’s lawyer accused the White House of mounting a politically motivated power grab over claims of mortgage fraud as cover to oust Cook and stack the Fed with Trump loyalists. “This is nothing more than a smear campaign,” insisted Abbe Lowell, Cook’s attorney. “Cause for the president means she won’t go along with the interest rate drop.”

The courtroom drama unfolded amid the backdrop of Federal Housing Finance Authority Chief Bill Pulte having dropped a Thursday night bombshell: a second “criminal referral” accusing Cook of “misrepresentations” about properties she owns – specifically that she claimed a second residence as an investment property, which follows Pulte’s initial criminal referral over Cook simultaneously claiming two properties as her ‘primary residence.’ Lowell torched the move as a desperate stunt: “Nothing in these vague, unsubstantiated allegations has any relevance to Gov. Cook’s role at the Federal Reserve, and they in no way justify her removal from the Board.” Apparently actual documents bearing Cook’s signature, which she hasn’t refuted, are now ‘unsubstantiated.’ What’s more, while Cook has denied any wrongdoing, she has yet to publicly explain her defense.

[..] The Justice Department has filed a response to Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook’s lawsuit over her Monday firing – claiming that the President was within his right to boot her over allegations of mortgage fraud (with a third property disclosed by Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Bill Pulte last night), and that Cook is “highly unlikely to prevail on the merits.” Trump’s legal team argues that the Federal Reserve Act (FRA) gives the President “broad discretion” to remove governors “for cause” and that courts cannot second-guess that judgment: “The Federal Reserve Act (FRA) empowers the President of the United States to appoint (by and with the advice and consent of the Senate) the members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. 12 U.S.C. § 241. Those Governors serve for fixed terms, “unless sooner removed for cause by the President.” Id. § 242. The statute thus expressly contemplates that, even setting aside his Article II authority over principal officers, the President retains broad discretion to remove a Governor for “cause.”

Citing Reagan v. United States (1901) and Dalton v. Specter (1994), they write “Where a statute commits decisionmaking to the discretion of the President, judicial review of the President’s decision is not available,” therefore Cook cannot get a temporary restraining order allowing her to stay in her job. The filing claims the “cause” for Cook’s removal comes from allegedly false statements in two 2021 mortgage applications: “In both agreements – entered within just weeks of each other – Dr. Cook represented that she would occupy each property as her ‘principal residence.’” Trump’s legal team frames this as potential mortgage fraud: “It is difficult, if not impossible, to see how Dr. Cook could possibly have honestly represented that she intended to occupy and use both a property in Michigan and a condominium in Atlanta as her ‘principal residence’ during the same period.”

They stress that criminal prosecution is not required: “The President need not prove criminal acts beyond a reasonable doubt to remove a principal officer.” To wit, “And under any standard, making facially contradictory statements in financial documents – whether a criminal burden of proof could be sustained or not – is more than sufficient ground for removing a senior financial regulator from office.”She Never Denied It The DOJ argues that Cook never rebutted the substance of the FHFA referral: “Dr. Cook does not try to claim that the contradictory representations were somehow truthful, or maintain that she acted without scienter.” Instead, she issued a statement: “I have no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet”

The filing claims this refusal to provide an explanation justifies removal: “Dr. Cook’s refusal even to offer an explanation or defense makes it all the more impossible to conclude that the ‘cause’ standard is unsatisfied.” In response to Cook’s claims that she was ‘deprived of notice’ and an opportunity to respond to the President’s concern over allegations of mortgage fraud, the DOJ notes that “no court has ever extended those due-process protections for employees to principal officers of the United States. Nor does the FRA purport to do so.” The Trump admin also argues that principal officers like Federal Reserve governors have no property interest in their office. “Dr. Cook had no property interest in her public office and was thus owed no notice or opportunity to be heard”

“Public office is not property’ and ‘the nature of the relation of a public officer to the public is inconsistent with either a property or a contract right.'” Trump’s filing also argues that Cook did receive notice:”The President gave Dr. Cook notice when he publicized the FHFA referral on August 20—and only acted to terminate her five days later, after it was clear that no adequate response was forthcoming.” The DOJ also notes that Cook has no explanation for the allegations. Incredibly, Dr. Cook even now hazards no explanation for her conduct and points to nothing she would say or prove in any “hearing” that would conceivably alter the President’s determination that the perception of financial misconduct alone is intolerable in this role. Under these circumstances, there is certainly no equitable basis for a reinstatement injunction.

Addressing Cook’s request for an injunction on her filing, the response asserts that recent decisions from the Supreme Court and the D.C. Circuit leave no doubt that reinstatement injunctions are improper. Cook hinted her firing stemmed from policy disagreements on Fed independence and interest rates. Trump’s filing denies this: “The President did not invoke a policy disagreement as the cause for Dr. Cook’s removal. Rather, his letter … made clear that he was acting based on her ‘deceitful and potentially criminal conduct’ in connection with the mortgage agreements.” Cook claimed she’d suffer irreparable harm if not reinstated. Trump disputes this: “Loss of employment does not constitute irreparable injury.” They also argue that the next Fed board meeting isn’t until September 16, 2025, meaning there’s no urgent harm justifying a TRO.

Read more …

“..she is methodically removing the corrupt people within the system who participate. In short, she’s doing the thing we wanted her to do – and that’s a problem for the system.“

• IC Leakers Target DNI Tulsi Gabbard Again (CTH)

The Wall Street Journal wrote the hit piece against DNI Tulsi Gabbard, sourced to two “people familiar with the matter,” and “three other people with knowledge of the situation.” They all needed to coordinate with the WSJ. Think about it. The substance of the story is that among the 37 current and former Intelligence Community officials Tulsi Gabbard recently stripped of their security clearances, was an “undercover CIA agent” located within one of those agencies. The story is written to say DNI Tulsi Gabbard should have vetted the list with the CIA for a longer period of time before she took action. Therefore, she is not doing her job correctly, or something. The CIA was compromised by Tulsi Gabbard removing the security clearance of one of their hidden agents within the U.S. Government.

Before getting to the story at hand, just stop and think of what the story is selling. The article says the placement of CIA agents throughout the administration’s agencies is commonplace. The CIA Director is not necessarily aware of these CIA operatives or operations that are taking place within the government. That point is one well worth thinking about. However, there’s another larger point that will fly past most casual observers. The Intelligence Community (IC), and let’s accept this one is likely the CIA (directorate of analysis) from the structure of the political hit, is leaking against DNI Tulsi Gabbard. Again, think. The issue at the heart of the CIA complaint is null and void unless the CIA publicly complains about it. If there was a valid, genuine, legitimate and valuable CIA asset within the 37 names who lost their security clearances, the issue would be quickly and quietly resolved by just not taking the action against that person.

Saying nothing, doing nothing, makes the “mistake” (if that’s what it was) disappear. The CIA complaining about it to the Wall Street Journal is what makes the issue a problem. That’s how you can identify this story as an organized Intelligence Community political hit against Tulsi Gabbard. Increasingly, it is becoming more and more clear that Tulsi Gabbard is factually doing what the Intelligence Community feared she would be doing. DNI Gabbard is targeting all of the political weaponization within the Intelligence Community, and she is methodically removing the corrupt people within the system who participate. In short, she’s doing the thing we wanted her to do – and that’s a problem for the system.

“Wall Street Journal – Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, surprised Central Intelligence Agency officials last week when she included an undercover senior CIA officer on a roster of 37 current and former officials she stripped of security clearances. Most of the 37 people had either participated in intelligence assessments related to Russia’s attempt to influence the outcome of the 2016 U.S. presidential election or had signed a 2019 letter calling for President Trump’s impeachment. Gabbard didn’t know the CIA officer had been working undercover, according to a person familiar with the fallout from the list’s release. Three other people with knowledge of the situation said that Gabbard’s office didn’t meaningfully consult with the CIA before releasing the list.

Gabbard’s office delivered the list of 37 people to the CIA the evening before the list’s release, according to three people familiar with the communications and emails read to The Wall Street Journal. The national intelligence office didn’t seek the CIA’s input about the composition of the list, and the CIA had no foreknowledge of Gabbard’s posting on X the following day that revealed the names, including that of the covered CIA officer, according to two of the people familiar with the events. In a memo announcing the revocations, Gabbard said she had acted on Trump’s orders. “Director of National Intelligence Gabbard directed the revocations to ensure individuals who have violated the trust placed in them by weaponizing, politicizing, manipulating, or leaking classified intelligence are no longer allowed to do so,” a spokeswoman in Gabbard’s office said.

[…] The CIA official whose clearance was revoked last week is a longtime Russia hand at the agency. The officer has held intelligence posts for more than 20 years and worked from 2014 to 2017 as an expert on Russia and Eurasia on the National Intelligence Council, according to a publicly listed biography. Earlier this year, the CIA officer spoke at a classified intelligence conference and was described as a senior executive manager in the CIA’s Europe and Eurasia mission center. […] It is a felony to reveal the identity of a covert intelligence officer or agent, though it is unclear if the statute could be applied to a government disclosure, or if including her on the list constitutes a disclosure.

Did ya’ll catch that little slip-up “her” inside the last sentence? Apparently, the person on the list, the hidden CIA operative that lost their security clearance, was a “her.” I watch the minutia closely, and this is one of those very rare instances where I can say, I find zero reason to doubt the intents and integrity goals of DNI Tulsi Gabbard. FTA: “The CIA officer spoke at a classified intelligence conference and was described as a senior executive manager in the CIA’s Europe and Eurasia mission center”… AFCEA Spring Intelligence Symposium: Ms. Julia Gurganus, Senior Executive Manager – Europe and Eurasia Mission Center, Central Intelligence Agency.

Read more …

“By calling Julia Gurganus an active and covert CIA operative, the scheme team within the directorate knew Gabbard would be unable to defend herself publicly. Discussing the identity of an active/covert CIA operative is against the law.”

• The CIA -vs- DNI Tulsi Gabbard (CTH)

If there is one key takeaway from what you are about to read, it would be this. DNI Tulsi Gabbard needs our support. DNI Gabbard is working deep within a massive silo system that manufacturers the illusion of isolation as a strategy to protect itself. “There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things.” Tulsi Gabbard and her team need to hear, see and feel our support. Yesterday, the CIA Directorate of Analysis purposefully framed a hit against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) by leaking a manufactured story that DNI Tulsi Gabbard had exposed an “undercover” agent when she removed the security clearances of 37 former and current intelligence embeds.

In reality, the CIA attempted to block Tulsi Gabbard from exposing how the CIA manipulated the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment claiming Russian interference in the 2016 election. Ms. Julia Gurganus was the CIA analyst who organized the ICA. As Tulsi Gabbard began to drill down onto the issue, and as the current CIA analysts within the former National Intelligence Council (NIC) and CIA Directorate of Analysis began to notice she was going to reveal the fraud, the CIA embeds changed the status of Julia Gurganus in June in an effort to protect her. The CIA changed the status of Julia Gurganus in June, reclassifying her as ‘covert’ specifically because the ODNI’s public statements of intent to reveal the fraud within the 2016 Russia election investigation. This, they schemed, would stop DNI Gabbard from exposing Gurganus and taking action.

The CIA scheme didn’t work. DNI Gabbard declassified and released the CIA work product, and then later removed Gurganus security clearance. The CIA embeds at the directorate of analysis were furious and leaked the false story to the Wall Street Journal using the familiar ploy that has worked for them in the past. By calling Julia Gurganus an active and covert CIA operative, the scheme team within the directorate knew Gabbard would be unable to defend herself publicly. Discussing the identity of an active/covert CIA operative is against the law. The CIA weaponized the law within their attack against the ODNI; leaking a false story they knew Tulsi couldn’t defend against. However, we the people are not stupid. It did not take long to figure out the identity of the asset from the curriculum vitae used in the Wall Street Journal story, and from that point it was clear Julia Gurganus was NOT previously a covert CIA operative. Gurganus was public in her position within the CIA; public, until the CIA changed her status in June.

This is ultimately an example of the weaponized intelligence system DNI Gabbard is fighting against. The current actions by the directorate of analysis inside the CIA is also an example of why DNI Gabbard removed the National Intelligence Council from the agency, fired Chairman Mike Collins (friend of Mike Morrell) and Deputy Chair Maria Langan-Riekhof, and also took control over the Presidential Daily Briefing material the fraudsters were in control of.

Remember, by design the CIA is a one-way information system. Information (intelligence) goes into the agency, the black hole where things can be linguistically modified and shaped to fit a particular viewpoint, yet there is no substantive mechanism for the CIA head to challenge the outflow of information if it is fraudulent. The intel bureaucrats run the machinery, and if the boss does something they don’t like they leak to the media. Silos exist, like the NIC or directorate of analysis, within the larger silo of the CIA. DNI Tulsi Gabbard is taking the lid off these sub-silos and exposing the activity that takes place within them. Cochroaches cower and run from sunlight.

The awesome thing about what they tried yesterday was a factual reveal to the American public that CIA operations are also domestic in nature. Most people believe the Schoolhouse Rock construct of government where the CIA is not allowed to operate domestically. The story surrounding Julia Gurganus active and covert status completely eviscerates that perspective. If covert CIA operatives are not permitted to engage in domestic governance, then why was covert CIA agent Julia Gurganus operating in government? The shield the CIA attempted to deploy becomes a weapon for us to expose their fraud. As this battle continues, and make no mistake this battle will continue, we will closely support the efforts of DNI Tulsi Gabbard to bring the weaponized IC to heel. Gabbard is the truth warrior we need and the Deep State is not happy about it.

“We are the greatest nation in the world because of our people — rooted in the principles of freedom and liberty that are enshrined in our Constitution. And it’s both our opportunity, our challenge, and our responsibility… to continue that mission for as long as we live.”

Read more …

Small packages valued at less than $800 are duty free. There were 1.36million of them in 2024. That’s not grandma sending birthday greetings. It’s industry. if the average value is half of $800, you’re talkng half a $trillion.

• Trump Closes De Minimis Loophole As Dark Chapter In Trade Ends (ZH)

The long-standing “de minimis” exemption, which allowed small packages valued less than $800 to enter the U.S. duty-free, officially ended Friday. This closes the dark chapter on an era when China flooded America with cheap junk (think $10 Bluetooth wireless speakers) and, according to many in the America First movement inside the White House, helped flood the nation with fentanyl precursor chemicals – if not fentanyl itself – and fueled the drug-death crisis unlike anything this nation has ever seen. Think of it as a modern-day reverse Opium War (hybrid warfare by the CCP). For those with a background in Latin, “de minimis” translates to “too small to matter.”

But that’s certainly not the case. Since 2015, the number of packages entering the U.S. under this exemption has surged from 134 million packages per year to 1.36 billion by 2024. Much of this flood originated from Chinese e-commerce giants, including SheIn Group and Temu. The decade-long tsunami of small packages flooding the U.S. didn’t just undercut domestic small businesses. It also created a backdoor for illegal drugs and fentanyl precursor chemicals from China to slip in undetected, fueling the drug-death crisis now killing more than 100,000 Americans every year.


Source: Heritage Foundation

“The de minimis exemption has been abused, with shippers sending illicit fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, precursors, and paraphernalia into the United States in reliance on the lower security measures applied to de minimis shipments, killing Americans,” the White House stated in late July. Washington-based Greg Husisian, head of the international trade practice at Foley & Lardner, told Bloomberg that President Trump “actually had bipartisan support” in tackling the de minimis exemption mess. “This was intended for grandma sending over an $80 package of toys, not like a huge Chinese company sending tens of thousands of packages every single day of $12 T-shirts,” Husisian pointed out.

Under the new rules enforced today via Trump’s executive order signed in July, all foreign shipments, except verified gifts under $100, will face new duties. We pointed out last week (read the report) that several global postal office services warned about emerging bottlenecks in U.S. inbound shipping lines over confusion about duty collections:
• Asia: Korea Post and SingPost are halting standard parcel services, while Japan warns of delays.
• Europe: Norway, Finland, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, and the UK are suspending or limiting services; Deutsche Post/DHL halted business parcels via postal networks.
• Australia: Transit shipments through Australia to the U.S. are paused, though direct U.S. deliveries remain.

Multinational logistics company DHL warned customers one week ago about mounting confusion over how duties would be collected. “Key questions remain unresolved, particularly regarding how and by whom customs duties will be collected in the future, what additional data will be required, and how the data transmission to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be carried out,” DHL stated in the letter. Millions of low-value packages today will lose their duty-free treatment and be subject to standard tariff rates or temporary flat fees of $80 to $200 per item for a period of six months. For more details on rates. Customs and Border Protection outlined earlier this month in a bulletin how the flat fees would be calculated, corresponding to the countries’ tariff rates. “It is a real concern that the dominoes are falling and there will be a ripple effect where more and more posts announce that they will be suspending packages to the US,” warned Kate Muth, executive director of the International Mailers Advisory Group, which represents the U.S. international mailing and shipping industry, quoted by Bloomberg last week.

Read more …

The Appeals Court appears to say: the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) is the wrong law. Find a better one before you face SCOTUS.

• Trump’s Global Tariffs Ruled Illegal By Washington Appeals Court, But… (ZH)

On the same day that President Trump flipped the switch on ‘de minimis’ exemptions, a US Appeals court has ruled that most of his global tariffs are illegal, finding that he exceeded his authority in imposing them. In May 2025, a lower court deemed them unlawful for exceeding presidential authority under a 1977 law, but the appeals court paused that ruling. And now, a panel of judges in Washington on Friday upheld an earlier ruling by the Court of International Trade that Trump wrongfully invoked an emergency law to issue the tariffs. But the appellate judges sent the case back to the lower court to determine if it applied to everyone affected by tariffs or just the parties involved in the case. However, this is not the end by a long way as the court also ruled that Trump’s tariffs can remain in effect pending appeals. Friday’s ruling extends the suspense over whether Trump’s tariffs will ultimately stand. The case had been expected to next go to the Supreme Court for a final decision.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1961568436762390560

Read more …

“..one of the shooter’s magazines bore the chilling message “kill Donald Trump.” However, ABC News reduced the violent intention behind those words, reporting vaguely that the shooter had written “the name of President Trump” on the firearms. It was as if they deliberately obscured the hostile meaning, almost insinuating the shooter was somehow a Trump supporter..”

• This May Be the Worst Media Gaslighting About Minneapolis Yet (Margolis)

The horrendous mass shooting at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis reveals something far more insidious than just violence; it exposes the media’s relentless drive to distort reality when an event clashes with their preferred narrative. This wasn’t just a random tragedy. It was a brutal attack during a mass marking the start of the school year at a Catholic school, in which two children lost their lives and 17 other people, including 14 students, were wounded. The assailant was a transgender individual named Robert “Robin” Westman, who had direct ties to the school: His mother retired from working there just a few years ago. Westman came armed with a manifesto and a cache of weapons. Yet, the coverage was anything but straightforward. It’s been a case study of how the media gaslights the public when a big story doesn’t fit their preferred narrative.

PJ Media previously reported that one of the shooter’s magazines bore the chilling message “kill Donald Trump.” However, ABC News reduced the violent intention behind those words, reporting vaguely that the shooter had written “the name of President Trump” on the firearms. It was as if they deliberately obscured the hostile meaning, almost insinuating the shooter was somehow a Trump supporter. Then there’s the baffling narrative spun by MSNBC, which bizarrely suggested the shooter was not radicalized by his documented hatred of Christians and conservatives but by his upbringing, the aftereffects of COVID, and even video games. But USA Today’s coverage truly takes the cake for its shameless gaslighting.

Not only did the paper not mention the attacker’s identity or his transgender status — a detail central to understanding the complexity of this case — it pivoted hard to link the shooting to motives that better fit the preferred left-wing narrative: A Voice of America report found that mass shootings at places of worship have grown in frequency since the mid-2000s – committed, it said, “by perpetrators with a history of racism, anti-Semitism, anti-Christianity and Islamophobia, with ties to white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.” Some of those attacks have been among the country’s most shocking: In 2015, a White supremacist shot and killed nine people gathered for Bible study at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina; in 2017, an assailant killed 26 people at First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs in rural Texas; and in 2018, a right-wing extremist killed 11 worshippers at Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life synagogue in the deadliest antisemitic attack on U.S. soil.

And then, apropos of nothing, they even dragged in an unrelated allegation about ICE supposedly causing attacks on churches. Nonetheless, some faith leaders have felt compelled to respond to threatened or actual violence around the country. “Religious denominations are really being pushed to decide how open these spaces are going to be when you have threats of random violence or an ICE raid,” Schmalz said. “Are churches really open spaces anymore? Or do they have to be protected from a society where there seem to be threats all around?”

They presented it as if it were part of the same fabric, despite none of this being connected to the Minneapolis shooting. The Minneapolis shooting wasn’t random. A transgender-identifying man who openly despised Christians and conservatives was responsible. Yet instead of reporting the truth, the media twisted itself into knots to protect its preferred narrative. That’s not journalism; it’s propaganda. By censoring facts and shielding the public from uncomfortable realities, these outlets aren’t simply betraying trust; they’re fueling more violence and confusion. Until they tell the full story, the cycle will only get worse.

Read more …

“Putin in Beijing on the Chinese Victory Day parade is a mirror image of Xi in Red Square on May 9..”

• Russia-China: From The Memory of WWII to BRICS/SCO Synergy (Pepe Escobar)

Three – interlocked – dates ahead of us could not be more crucial in shaping the next configuration of the currently incandescent geopolitical chessboard.
1) August 31/September 1st. Tianjin – half-an-hour by high-speed rail (120 km, roughly $8) from Beijing. The annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), with all 10 member-states, two observers (Afghanistan and Mongolia) and 14 dialogue partners (plenty from Southeast Asia). Crucially, Putin, Xi and Modi (his first visit to China in 7 years) will be on the same table, as well as Iran’s Pezeshkian. That’s a compounded BRICS/SCO heavyweight show. This summit may be a turning point for the SCO as much as the summit in Kazan last year was for BRICS.

2.) September 3. The Victory Day Parade in Tian’anmen Square, officially celebrating the 80th anniversary of “the Victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War”. No less than 26 heads of state will be present, including Putin (on a 4-day state visit). They come from all over the Global South, but none from the Global North.

3.) September 3. Vladivostok. The start of the 10th Eastern Economic Forum (EEF), a must-go to understand the finer points of the Russian national strategic priority to develop the Arctic and the Russian Far East, including vast tracts of Siberia; that’s a mirror policy of the Chinese effort to “Go West”, which started in 1999, to develop Tibet and Xinjiang. A who’s who of corporate and business circles from all latitudes across Eurasia will be present in Vladivostok. Putin addresses the plenary session right after his return from China. Taken together, these three dates span the whole spectrum of the Russia-China strategic partnership; the increasingly interlocked geopolitical and geoeconomic aspects of Eurasia integration and Global South solidarity; and the concerted push by Eurasia actors to accelerate the drive towards a multi-nodal, equanimous system of international relations.

It’s impossible to overstate how important the Victory Day parade is for the People’s Republic of China. The Chinese in a thousand years – and more – will never accept WWII American revisionism such as “the US and Japan jointly ended a war 80 years ago”. And much less European revisionism: “Europe’s commemorations of the Normandy Landings also involved a shocking rewriting of the history of the Eastern Front. These actions remind us that the September 3rd military parade’s attendance list has become a criterion for identifying which countries remain steadfast in their anti-fascist stance.” So Putin in Beijing on the Chinese Victory Day parade is a mirror image of Xi in Red Square on May 9, when Russia officially celebrated the 80th anniversary of the USSR victory in the Great Patriotic War.

No wonder the Chinese Foreign Ministry is adamant: the historical victory of WWII cannot be distorted. And this shared historical memory – vehemently against Nazi-fascism and its resurgence in the West – is a guiding light for the Russia-China multilateral, multipolar, and multi-nodal coordination, from the UN – unfortunately sliding towards irrelevancy – to the dynamic BRICS and SCO. Modi talking directly to Xi on Sunday, on the sidelines of the SCO summit, seals the sorry fate of the tariff war on India – part and parcel of the Empire of Chaos Hybrid War on BRICS, and for that matter, a great deal of the Global Majority. The latest mantra spun by Trump 2.0 circles is that New Delhi is supporting Moscow’s war on Ukraine by buying Russian oil, thus helping to enrich Putin even more. End result: the original RIC (Russia-India-China), all of them sanctioned/tariffed, locked up in a tight embrace.

Vladivostok may carry a few surprises – but on the US-Russia business front. First of all, speculation is rife on whether Trump might have decided to turn the planned EU theft of Russian foreign assets upside down, and instead force the funds to be invested in the American economy. If that would be the case – after all Trump himself proclaims “I can do anything I want” – there’s absolutely nothing the chihuahua EUrocracy can do to prevent it. Then there’s the enticing possibility of US-Russia deals being discussed. One option would be ExxonMobil returning to the Sakhalin-1 mega gas project. There’s also immense American oil industry interest in re-starting the sale of equipment for LNG projects, including the Arctic LNG-2; and the US purchasing Russian nuclear icebreakers.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Dragonfly
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1961311603380346904

Donkey

Penguin
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1961305134094241958

Twins

Baby
https://twitter.com/SueSpurgin/status/1961332549709422629

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 22 2025

Aug 222025
 
 August 22, 2025  Posted by at 7:23 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  47 Responses »


Georgia O’Keeffe Sunflower, New Mexico I 1935

 

• Appeals Court Tosses Trump’s $454 Million Civil Fraud Judgement (ZH)
• Putin ‘Looks Out’ For Russia’s Interests – Vance (RT)
• Zelensky Says Meeting With Putin ‘Definitely Not In Moscow’ (RT)
• Russia Insists It Has Veto Power Over Any ‘Security Guarantees’ (ZH)
• Kiev’s European Backers Want F-35 ‘Security Guarantee‘ – The Times (RT)
• Ukraine Could Recruit ‘Millions’ of Foreigners – MP (RT)
• Ukraine Not Interested In Peace – Lavrov (RT)
• “Daddy” Trump and Western Europe’s Oath of Allegiance (Bordachev)
• Trump Dominated and Humiliated the EU. Publicly (Lukyanov)
• Ukraine’s Future – A Steppe Corridor – A Neutral, Transit-oriented State (MoA)
• DNI Gabbard Reduces Staff 40%, Eliminates $700 Million in IC Spending (CTH)
• Tulsi Stares Down UK, Scoring Another Big Win for American Consumers (Green)
• FBI Director Kash Patel Outlines Current Status of FBI Reform Effort (CTH)
• Matt Gaetz Interviews Ed Martin On Adam Schiff, Jan 6 Committee (CTH)
• Previous History Indicates that War Is Our Future (Paul Craig Roberts)
• Scandal Threatens to Unravel Newsom’s Gerrymandering Power Grab (Margolis)
• Chris Cuomo Declares the Democrat Party ‘Dead’ (Margolis)

 

 

Ursulahttps://twitter.com/eugyppius1/status/1958188510344630425

https://twitter.com/PapiTrumpo/status/1958290851228184763

Lutnick

Slavery
https://twitter.com/PapiTrumpo/status/1958212350802026523

JGB

https://twitter.com/Megatron_ron/status/1958477133963030829

 

 

 

 

This concerns the case where the Trump Organization supposedly defrauded banks that already did their due diligence, by overestimating the value of its assets to get better loans. In the immortal words of Judge Arthur Engeron: “..engaged in frauds that “leap off the page and shock the conscience…”

Not sure it is what it seems. Trump calls it a complete victory, perfect even, but from what I can see the appeals court only struck down the “excessive penalty”. The rest appears to stand. Perhaps best illustrated by the fact that Letitia James’s office say they “won’t be dropping the case”. Of coure, Letitia shouldn’t have an office at all anymore, anymore than Engeron should be a judge.

• Appeals Court Tosses Trump’s $454 Million Civil Fraud Judgement (ZH)

A New York appeals court has tossed out a $454 million civil fraud judgement handed down last year against Donald Trump, his family, and his company. While the Appellate Division’s First Department upheld the ruling, it found that the $454 million penalty was excessive and at odds with the Eighth Amendment. “The documentary evidence supports Supreme Court’s conclusion that the Attorney General made a prima facie showing that each defendant participated in the fraudulent scheme,” reads the opinion. “The trial record is also replete with evidence supporting the court’s determination that the individual defendants had the requisite intent to defraud, a necessary element of each Penal Law claim.” The decision comes after New York Attorney General Letitia James’s office asked an appeals court last August to uphold the $454 million civil fraud judgment against Trump.

The appellate judges, however, said of the judgement; “while harm certainly occurred, it was not the cataclysmic harm that can justify a nearly half billion-dollar award to the State.” In response to the decision, President Trump claimed ‘TOTAL VICTORY in the FAKE New York State Attorney General Letitia James Case!” “The amount, including Interest and Penalties, was over $550 Million Dollars. It was a Political Witch Hunt, in a business sense, the likes of which no one has ever seen before. This was a Case of Election Interference by the City and State trying to show, illegally, that I did things that were wrong when, in fact, everything I did was absolutely CORRECT and, even, PERFECT,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. The case can now be appealed by either side to the state’s highest court, the New York Court of Appeals.

“Today’s ruling by the New York appeals court is a resounding victory for President Trump and his company,” Trump’s former personal attorney, Alina Habba, said in response. “The court struck down the outrageous and unlawful $464 million penalty, confirming what we have said from the beginning: the Attorney General’s case was politically motivated, legally baseless, and grossly excessive.” Following a three-month civil trial last year, Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable for inflating his net worth to secure better business deals, writing in his decision that Trump and his co-defendants engaged in frauds that “leap off the page and shock the conscience,” adding “Their complete lack of contrition and remorse borders on pathological. They are accused only of inflating asset values to make more money. The documents prove this over and over again.”

Trump has long claimed that the case was politically motivated, saying “I’ve been persecuted by someone running for office,” referring to NY Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the case – and is currently under investigation for her own real estate fraud. In his February decision, Engoron temporarily barred Trump and his family from leading New York-based companies, along with the $454 million fine. With interest, the penalty was closer to half-a-billion dollars. Trump denied all wrongdoing – arguing that the alleged victims in the case were sophisticated banks who were happy to go into business with the Trump Organization, and profited from the deals. Meanwhile, Trump’s lawyers argued that James violated the statue of limitations, misapplied the relevant law, and encouraged the excessive penalty.

Read more …

“Vance said he was “more soft-spoken than you would necessarily expect” from the way he’s portrayed by Western media.”

• Putin ‘Looks Out’ For Russia’s Interests – Vance (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin is “looking out for the interests” of his country, US Vice President J.D. Vance has said. According to Vance, both Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump prioritize their nations’ interests, which explains the respect each has for the other. Vance made the remarks following Trump’s meeting with Putin last week in Alaska and a phone call between the two on Monday, during talks with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and EU leaders. Trump called the talks “productive” and said a settlement of the Ukraine conflict was now more realistic. Asked to describe Putin on Laura Ingraham’s show on Wednesday, Vance said he was “more soft-spoken than you would necessarily expect” from the way he’s portrayed by Western media.

“He’s very deliberate. He’s very careful. And I think fundamentally he’s a person who looks out for the interest – as he sees it – of Russia,” Vance said. He added that “while [Putin and Trump] often disagree about issues,” the US president is willing to work with the Russian leader on achieving a Ukraine settlement, which Vance called “an important goal for America.” On Monday, Trump said he had started arrangements for a one-on-one meeting between Putin and Zelensky, to be followed by a trilateral summit. Moscow has not confirmed any plans for the meetings, but proposed to elevate the level of heads of delegations at talks with Ukraine.

Putin has not ruled out meeting with Zelensky but has insisted it must follow tangible progress in negotiations. He has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, noting that his presidential term has expired and warning that any agreement he signs could be overturned. Commenting on a potential Putin-Zelensky meeting, Vance said he and Trump both support it and believe it should happen even if not all issues are resolved beforehand. He described Ukraine’s call for post-conflict security guarantees and Russia’s demand that Kiev recognize the current realities on the ground as the main obstacles in negotiations.

Read more …

This is what you get when you appease the piano dick in the Oval Office; nonsensical drivel. You can either let him talk, or you can have peace. Can’t have both.

• Zelensky Says Meeting With Putin ‘Definitely Not In Moscow’ (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has ruled out meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow, saying he prefers talks to be held in a “neutral” part of Europe. Speculation about a possible Putin-Zelensky meeting arose after the Russian president met with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, last week in Alaska. Trump later met with Zelensky and EU leaders, followed by a 40-minute call with Putin, and posted on Truth Social that he had “begun the arrangements for a meeting [between Putin and Zelensky] at a location to be determined.” Media reports claimed Putin had suggested Moscow as a venue. “There can definitely be no meeting in Moscow,” Zelensky told reporters on Thursday, without elaborating. He said he wants the US to coordinate the negotiations with Russia, but also would like Kiev’s European allies involved.

“I would like Europe to be present as well. The negotiations must take place in a neutral part of Europe,” he said, suggesting Austria, Türkiye, and Switzerland as options. The Kremlin has not confirmed any plans for a Putin-Zelensky meeting, but Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Wednesday that Moscow was ready to raise the status of its delegation-level peace negotiations with Ukraine. Lavrov said Putin raised the idea after his call with Trump. Putin has not ruled out meeting Zelensky but has insisted that it could only come after the negotiation process has produced tangible progress. Moscow has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, noting his term as president has expired and warning any deals he signs could be overturned by his successor.

Trump said this week he preferred that Putin and Zelensky meet before a potential three-way summit be held. He called his talks with Putin in Alaska “very productive” and said a settlement was now more realistic. Media reports have claimed Washington is planning a three-way summit between Putin, Trump, and Zelensky in Hungary. Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto confirmed on Thursday that Budapest would be a realistic venue, including for a potential one-on-one between Putin and Zelensky, arguing Hungary is the only Western country that has maintained a “fair, mutually respectful” relationship with all sides. Zelensky, however, dismissed Hungary as a venue, citing its efforts to block EU military aid to Ukraine.

Read more …

“Putin agreed to European and U.S. security guarantees..”

He agreed there would/could be some. He never agreed to any specific ones.

“Lavrov’s remarks were a potent sign that Moscow’s maximalist demands in the war haven’t shifted despite a surge in diplomatic engagement in recent days.”

• Russia Insists It Has Veto Power Over Any ‘Security Guarantees’ (ZH)

Now nearly a week out from last Friday’s historic Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, the White House has had to temper its positive predictions on the peace process, after prematurely touting that a Putin and Zelensky bilateral meeting was on the horizon. By Wednesday the Kremlin had made it clear this is not yet the case. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov issued some non-committal statements, watering down what appeared an already vague commitment. A future direct meeting with the Ukrainian leader – a president which Moscow previously dubbed illegitimate – would have to be prepared “gradually… starting with the expert level and thereafter going through all the required steps.”

A separate Russian official has stated that “it shouldn’t be a meeting for the sake of a meeting” – highlighting that despite Trump’s strong diplomatic efforts, Russia remains ‘open’ but doesn’t consider the warring sides to have bridged key major gaps on peace terms just yet. On Thursday The Wall Street Journal underscored that there’s yet another key divide – the question of future security guarantees and how they will be monitored or implemented: Russia warned on Wednesday that it should effectively hold veto power over any action to assist Ukraine after a peace deal is reached, rendering planned Western security guarantees for Kyiv moot and delivering a setback to negotiations championed by President Trump.

…Lavrov’s insistence that Russia must have a say in how any security guarantees for Ukraine would be enacted contradicted the Trump administration’s assertion that Putin agreed to European and U.S. security guarantees at the Alaska summit on Friday. Lavrov’s remarks were a potent sign that Moscow’s maximalist demands in the war haven’t shifted despite a surge in diplomatic engagement in recent days. Western security assurances to deter against future Russian invasions are key to getting Ukraine to sign on to a peace deal. Russia has never wavered on insisting that NATO or Western forces never be allowed to patrol or have a presence in Ukraine. Moscow’s war justification from the beginning has been focused on the question of NATO expansion, and demanding permanent Ukrainian neutrality.

Strangely, while President Trump has this week assured Russia of ‘no US boots on the ground’ – the White House spokesperson at the same time suggested there could be some kind of pledged US or Western air support as part of future security guarantees. But the messaging has been contradictory as at the same time Trump has been pledging ‘minimal’ American involvement in any future security guarantees for Ukraine. Moscow will likely present the targeted Mukachevo plant as military or ‘dual use’ in nature… Geopolitical news source Moon of Alabama reacted as follows:

”While Russia is confidently prosecuting the war in Ukraine towards its inevitable end. Meanwhile the ‘West’ is still negotiating with itself about the conditions under which it will have to capitulate. Discussions continue about ‘security guarantees’ for Ukraine even as the only serious ones are those that Russia is willing to give. The confused arguments about ‘guarantees’ are reflected in the reports of them. Consider this nonsense: “A security guarantee could encompass a wide range of issues. In return for Russia ending its invasion, a security pact could include a pledge of U.S. air support for any European-led operations should Russian troops resume their assault.”
If Russia ends the war NATO-like ‘security guarantees’ are to be given to Ukraine as a reward?

Indeed, it’s as if Trump and his top officials still don’t understand the core problems, or at least purposefully ignore what remain the root causes to this war. Trump wants to see more rapid momentum and engagement come out of the Alaska summit, hoping for a Putin-Zelensky summit within days or weeks. But that’s very unlikely to happen, also given Zelensky – with the encouragement of the more hawkish European allies – has still not offered substantive compromise. He reportedly isn’t even willing to lift restrictions on the use of the Russian language in public discourse or media.

Read more …

They will forever try to push against, and beyond, the red lines.

• Kiev’s European Backers Want F-35 ‘Security Guarantee‘ – The Times (RT)

Kiev’s Western European backers have asked the US to deploy F-35 jets to Romania as “security guarantees” to help end the Ukraine conflict, The Times reported on Wednesday. In addition, they reportedly want Washington to supply Kiev with Patriot and NASAMS interceptor missiles, as well as “permission to fly spy planes over the Black Sea.” US President Donald Trump on Tuesday told Fox News that he had ruled out deploying American troops to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal with Russia but that air support was possible. “They are willing to put people on the ground. We’re willing to help them with things, especially, probably… by air,” he said.

Senior Western European and US military chiefs have since met in Washington to discuss the “logistics” of a security package, The Times wrote. NATO already runs what the paper described as “policing missions” over the Black Sea from the Mihail Kogalniceanu airbase in Romania, its largest European airbase. The facility was used by US forces during their invasion of Iraq and would most likely serve as a base for the F-35s, The Times wrote. European NATO countries also reportedly want guarantees that they would have access to US satellite and intelligence data, according to the newspaper.

Moscow has previously warned that any airfields, in any country, will be legitimate targets if they host jets participating in combat missions against Russian troops involved in the Ukraine conflict. Russia has also repeatedly warned that it will consider any NATO troops deployed in Ukraine as valid military targets – whether they are sent under the guise of “peacekeepers” or otherwise. Any such deployment risks a direct clash and “uncontrollable escalation” between Russia and the West, Moscow has said.

Read more …

“..there are millions of people in the world who are ready to fight against Russia, especially given the financial compensation…This is realistic,” he said.”

• Ukraine Could Recruit ‘Millions’ of Foreigners – MP (RT)

Ukraine should recruit for its military “millions” of foreigners willing to fight against Russia, lawmaker Aleksey Goncharenko has proposed. The MP was addressing Kiev’s frontline manpower crisis and the harsh ongoing conscription campaign, which he likened to the Nazi Gestapo. Speaking at a Ukrainian parliamentary session on Wednesday, Goncharenko, a member of the European Solidarity party led by former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko, voiced outrage over the brutality of press gangs and proposed that Kiev could sidestep the issue by relying on foreign fighters. “We need to engage in foreign recruitment – there are millions of people in the world who are ready to fight against Russia, especially given the financial compensation…This is realistic,” he said.

Goncharenko earlier proposed dismantling Ukraine’s current military-managed recruitment system and replacing it with a civilian-run one. “Instead of all this, there are the shameful Territorial Recruitment Centers, which are already behaving just like the Gestapo,” he said, referring to the secret police of Nazi Germany that was notorious for its numerous atrocities. “This cannot continue. It must be immediately corrected, because otherwise, if the people stop believing in the state, we will lose the state,” he added. Russia has warned that foreign mercenaries fighting for Ukraine are treated as “legitimate targets” and has on numerous occasions struck bases where they have been deployed. In 2024, the Russian Defense Ministry said that more than 13,000 foreign mercenaries have fought on Ukraine’s side since 2022, and that nearly 6,000 had been killed.

Ukraine announced a general mobilization shortly after the start of the conflict, barring most men aged 18 to 60 from leaving the country. In 2024, Kiev lowered the draft age from 27 to 25 and tightened mobilization rules to replenish mounting battlefield losses. The forced conscription campaign has regularly featured violent clashes between draft officers and reluctant recruits, thus triggering discontent in the country. On Wednesday, several media outlets cited what they described as a leaked Ukrainian military index obtained by Russian hackers suggesting more than 1.7 million Ukrainian troops have been killed or declared missing since the start of the conflict.

Read more …

“He suggested that Ukraine’s refusal to discuss a settlement before receiving security guarantees is intended to preserve what he called the “neo-Nazi, Russophobic regime” in Kiev.”

• Ukraine Not Interested In Peace – Lavrov (RT)

Kiev is openly demonstrating it has no interest in long-term peace with Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said, pointing to recent remarks by Ukrainian officials. Following the summit in Alaska between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, and subsequent talks in Washington with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and European leaders, the US administration said a peace deal had become more feasible. The White House described the outcome of the talks as progress, noting there was “a light at the end of the tunnel.” At a press conference on Thursday, Lavrov confirmed that significant progress had been achieved during the Alaska summit. However, he underlined that Ukrainian officials continue to comment on a possible resolution “in a very specific way that shows they are not interested in a sustainable, fair, long-term settlement.”

He pointed to a statement by key Zelensky adviser Mikhail Podoliak, who recently stated that Kiev would acknowledge that some regions are “de facto” lost to Russia. However, once Kiev secures security guarantees it would seek to regain them and demand that the West impose sanctions aimed at weakening Russia and damaging its economy. According to Lavrov, such rhetoric demonstrates that the Ukrainian leadership, encouraged by its Western sponsors, are pursuing goals antithetical to the joint efforts of Trump and Putin to eliminate the root causes of the crisis. Instead of working toward a settlement, Lavrov argued, Kiev and its backers want to aggravate those causes further by forming anti-Russian military alliances. He suggested that Ukraine’s refusal to discuss a settlement before receiving security guarantees is intended to preserve what he called the “neo-Nazi, Russophobic regime” in Kiev.

The minister also accused Kiev’s European sponsors of trying to “disrupt” the peace agenda by ignoring Russia’s interests and demanding security guarantees for a country “that professes neo-Nazi values, grossly violates the rights of national minorities, legislatively tries to exterminate the Russian language in all spheres of life, prohibits the canonical Orthodox Church.” “I hope this recklessness will fail and we will continue to follow the course agreed upon by President Putin and President Trump,” Lavrov said.

Read more …

“The central lesson of Washington was the EU’s dependence – and its public acceptance of subordination to American leadership. The White House gathering laid bare the infantilization of Western Europe.”

• “Daddy” Trump and Western Europe’s Oath of Allegiance (Bordachev)

American politics has always been part performance, part power play. Domestic and foreign policy alike are wrapped in spectacle, but the drama often conceals deeper realities. This week’s meeting between Donald Trump and Western Europe’s leading politicians in Washington was a vivid example. What looked like theatre – leaders lined up in the Oval Office, each playing their role – carried consequences of genuine strategic weight. The real subject of the summit was not Ukraine. Attempts to resolve that conflict continue, but its outcome will be determined far from Brussels, Paris, or Berlin. The central lesson of Washington was the EU’s dependence – and its public acceptance of subordination to American leadership. The White House gathering laid bare the infantilization of Western Europe.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is said to have previously described Trump as “Daddy,” and the metaphor has stuck. The Europeans behaved as children trying not to provoke a temper: flattering, nodding, adapting themselves to his moods. There were even reports of EU and British officials advising Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on how to thank the American president, what words to use, even what clothes to wear. Absurd? Perhaps. But this is the political reality of the West today: the EU no longer behaves as a political entity with its own agency. Its leaders perform before Trump in hopes of appeasement. To be fair, Washington has never shown great delicacy in dealing with its allies. From De Gaulle to Schroeder, European leaders have often found their views brushed aside by American presidents. But the context is new.

Facing unprecedented competition with China and with its ability to skim rents from globalization fading, and under pressure from shifting energy and trade patterns, Washington no longer feels compelled to show even symbolic respect for Western Europe. The only alternative for the US would be full-scale self-isolation – a path floated in the last election but one for which Americans remain unprepared. On the contrary, despite its weakness, Europe now represents Washington’s last major platform for maintaining global influence. In the Middle East, even monarchies traditionally dependent on American defense are asserting independence. Across Asia, only Japan and South Korea remain fully loyal, though even they quietly maintain contact with Moscow.

Thus, the Americans must finish what previous administrations began: breaking Western Europe completely to their will. Trump, with his showmanship, has simply made the process more theatrical and humiliating. The Washington meeting crystallized this reality. The leaders of Britain, Germany, France, and Italy – the core of Western Europe – were required to stand on stage and sign a statement endorsing US policy on Ukraine. The heads of the EU and NATO joined in. Each leader searched for his or her own words of submission, and all found them. What looked absurd was in fact deadly serious. It was not about Ukraine’s fate – Kiev is merely a bargaining chip. It was about these European leaders publicly renouncing their autonomy. In practice, it was an oath of allegiance to Washington. From Russia’s perspective, three conclusions follow.

First, the EU and Great Britain cease to exist as independent actors. After the Cold War, it was briefly fashionable to speak of European strategic autonomy. As late as 2003, Germany and France opposed the US invasion of Iraq. Today, such defiance is unimaginable. Western Europe has become an appendage of the United States. Second, Russia’s strategy towards the region must change. For years, Moscow calculated that other European states, though dependent, could still act with partial independence and might support Russian interests under the right circumstances. Indeed, Russia’s most serious clashes with the West occurred when Western unity fractured. That assumption can no longer stand. Western Europe is now firmly absorbed into Washington’s orbit – a cog in a larger American machine. Third, Russia and China must reassess their approach. Beijing still regards the EU as a potential neutral partner in its rivalry with Washington. But the Oval Office spectacle shows this is an illusion. Treating Western Europe as independent risks undermining the strategic interests of both Russia and China. The same applies to India and other BRICS partners who maintain strong ties to states in the region: they, too, must rethink their assumptions.

Read more …

“Faced with this reality, Western Europe has chosen a strategy of unrestrained flattery. Leaders believe that by praising Trump, they can slip their own disagreements into the conversation.”

• Trump Dominated and Humiliated the EU. Publicly (Lukyanov)

From a theatrical point of view, Monday’s Washington summit between US President Donald Trump and Western Europe’s leaders was a vivid spectacle. Each official played their role, some with greater skill than others. But behind the carefully staged performance, the real story emerged: the region’s inability to act as a political entity in its own right. Contrary to media spin, the meeting was not about Ukraine. Attempts to resolve the crisis continue, but its outcome will ultimately be decided not in Brussels or Berlin, but by non-European powers. The real lesson from Washington lay in the display of Western Europe’s dependence. Every move by these Western European leaders was aimed at one goal: not angering the American president. In the words of NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Trump has become “Daddy” – a figure to be placated with smiles, tributes, and flattery.

Leaders compared notes on how best to manage his moods, even down to reportedly advising Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky on what to wear, what to say, and how to thank him. This might sound absurd. But that is the political reality of the transatlantic relationship. The EU no longer acts with autonomy. Its politics revolve around managing the temper of a man in Washington. Of course, Trump’s personality is unique, but it would be a mistake to reduce the issue to character. The essence is deeper: Western Europe has suddenly realized the scale of its strategic, political and economic dependence on the United States. Put bluntly, the half-continent can do very little without America – even in matters that directly touch its own interests. This dependency did not appear overnight. Ironically, it deepened under Joe Biden.

With his rhetoric of “unprecedented transatlantic solidarity,” the former president made Western Europe carry much of the political and economic burden of the conflict with Russia. The United States reaped the economic benefits, while the costs were shifted to the Old World. Trump has simply made this arrangement overt. He openly treats the Europeans not as partners, but as tools. In his eyes, the EU exists to finance American priorities and later to handle the technical details of a post-settlement Ukraine. Western Europe’s “position” counts for little if it differs from Washington’s. The recent trade talks proved the point: negotiations went America’s way, and his guests accepted it. Faced with this reality, Western Europe has chosen a strategy of unrestrained flattery. Leaders believe that by praising Trump, they can slip their own disagreements into the conversation.

But the approach is self-defeating. Trump regards praise not as persuasion but as recognition of self-evident truth: if you admire me, I must be right. Join me, and keep applauding. Brussels reassures itself that this humiliation is temporary, the product of one unusual leader. When Trump leaves, normality will return. But the illusion will not last. For over two decades – since the presidency of George W. Bush – Washington has been steadily shifting its strategic focus away from Europe. This course has been consistent across parties and presidents. It will not change after Trump. And given the current willingness of EU leaders to grovel, future US presidents will expect no less.

Read more …

“A close economic and political partnership with Russia, unwanted or not, is indeed the most likely future for whatever is by then left of Ukraine.”

• Ukraine’s Future – A Steppe Corridor – A Neutral, Transit-oriented State (MoA)

While Russia is confidently prosecuting the war in Ukraine towards its inevitable end. Meanwhile the ‘West’ is still negotiating with itself about the conditions under which it will have to capitulate. Discussions continue about ‘security guarantees’ for Ukraine even as the only serious ones are those that Russia is willing to give. The confused arguments about ‘guarantees’ are reflected in the reports of them. Consider this nonsense: “A security guarantee could encompass a wide range of issues. In return for Russia ending its invasion, a security pact could include a pledge of U.S. air support for any European-led operations should Russian troops resume their assault.” If Russia ends the war NATO like ‘security guarantees’ are to be given to Ukraine as a reward? How is that supposed to compute? Russia started this war to prevent a further extension of NATO into Ukraine. Why should it end the fighting if, in consequence, Ukraine would end up as a quasi-member of that pact? All the ‘security guarantees’ talk is just obfuscation of the attempt by some European leaders to prolong the war by further dragging the U.S. into it:

“Days before the [sanctions] deadline expired, Putin invited Witkoff to Moscow and offered a proposal, seen by the White House as sufficient grounds to set up last week’s Alaska summit meeting. There, Putin succeeded in convincing Trump that an immediate ceasefire to allow for complex peace negotiations was not required, allowing Russia to continue its attacks on Ukraine, without the risk of new U.S. sanctions. The move alarmed European leaders, who raced to Washington on Monday to back up Zelensky during a meeting at the White House. After the meeting, they appeared satisfied by Trump’s openness to security guarantees. If Putin does not accept the terms, that could make the Kremlin the obstacle to Trump’s peace deal, insulating Ukraine from having to choose between untenable concessions of territory and inviting Trump’s ire.“

Russia is not going to allow any of this: “[O]n Wednesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov struck a blow at another major part of Trump’s peace effort, downplaying expectations for a swift bilateral meeting with the Ukrainian president, and further blocking the prospects for any deal on security guarantees for Ukraine. He said Russia would only agree to the measures if it had an effective veto over future efforts to defend Kyiv.” Russia will simply stick to its plan: Russia’s conditions to end its war would essentially subvert Ukraine’s sovereignty, neuter its military and seize territory in eastern Ukraine that it has not captured in battle. Moscow wants to also permanently bar Ukraine from NATO and other international groupings and prevent it from hosting foreign troops — terms that would force Ukraine into a close, unwanted economic and political partnership with Russia.

A close economic and political partnership with Russia, unwanted or not, is indeed the most likely future for whatever is by then left of Ukraine. Some Ukrainians, like the former presidential advisor Alexander Arestovich, do understand that: “The key task for Ukraine today in all these Alaskan tales is to preserve political independence in the long term… Ukraine has only one way to preserve it: acknowledging the shared symbolic capital with Russia and Belarus, adopting a neutral status, and building good-neighborly relations with Russia and Belarus while maintaining political independence and the unique role of a “crossroads of worlds”- between Russia and Europe. Economically, the most promising role is that of a “steppe corridor” – between Russia, Central Asia, the South Caucasus, and the EU.

In short, this is about a fundamental shift in project orientation – from a narrow, nationalist one to a broad, transit-oriented one. In a sense, this could be called a “Great Return” – to Ukraine’s natural historical and cultural role. By way of analogy – modern Kazakhstan. … In conclusion, the fundamental challenge for Ukraine lies not in tactical maneuvers but in recognizing the strategic perspective: the necessity of reimagining its role as a neutral, transit-oriented state in order to preserve independence in the emerging geopolitical order.

Read more …

Tulsi may well be the most effective member of the Trump admin so far.

• DNI Gabbard Reduces Staff 40%, Eliminates $700 Million in IC Spending (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has announced a major shift in reducing the role of the Intelligence Community and eliminating the politization of intelligence information. As we have discussed on these pages for several years, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence was created shortly before the Obama administration took power, and subsequently the fledgling organization was weaponized for domestic influence operations. DNI Tulsi Gabbard takes a major step in addressing this problem. In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were created specifically for this purpose. What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Wednesday, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard announced a long-overdue transformation of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to refocus on executing its core national security mission with integrity in the most agile, effective, and efficient way. This will reduce ODNI by over 40% by the end of fiscal year 2025 and save taxpayers over $700 million per year and better enable ODNI to focus on fulfilling its critical role of serving as the central hub for intelligence integration, strategic guidance, and oversight over the Intelligence Community. ODNI was created after the horrific Islamist terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, exposed systemic failures across the Intelligence Community (IC). Its purpose was to integrate intelligence from and provide oversight over all IC elements (currently 18) in order to ensure the intelligence provided to the President and policymakers is timely, accurate, and apolitical.

Unfortunately, two decades later, ODNI has fallen short in fulfilling its mandate. “Over the last 20 years, ODNI has become bloated and inefficient, and the intelligence community is rife with abuse of power, unauthorized leaks of classified intelligence, and politicized weaponization of intelligence,” said DNI Tulsi Gabbard. “ODNI and the IC must make serious changes to fulfill its responsibility to the American people and the U.S. Constitution by focusing on our core mission: find the truth and provide objective, unbiased, timely intelligence to the President and policymakers. Ending the weaponization of intelligence and holding bad actors accountable are essential to begin to earn the American people’s trust which has long been eroded. Under President Trump’s leadership, ODNI 2.0 is the start of a new era focused on serving our country, fulfilling our core national security mission with excellence, always grounded in the U.S. Constitution, and ensuring the safety, security, and freedom of the American people.”

ODNI 2.0 eliminates redundant missions, functions and personnel, and makes critical investments in areas that support the President’s national intelligence priorities, and focuses on rebuilding trust, exposing politicization and weaponization of intelligence, holding bad actors accountable, saving American tax dollars, and focusing on our core mission: protecting the safety, security, and freedom of the American people. Washington DC created the modern national security apparatus immediately and hurriedly after 9/11/01. DHS came along in 2002 and within the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 the ODNI was formed. When Barack Obama and Eric Holder arrived a few years later, those newly formed institutions were viewed as opportunities to create a very specific national security apparatus that would focus almost exclusively against their political opposition.

The preexisting Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Dept of Justice (DOJ) were then repurposed to become two of the four pillars of the domestic national security apparatus. However, this new construct would have a targeting mechanism based on political ideology. The DHS, ODNI, DOJ and FBI became the four pillars of this new institution. Atop these pillars is where you will find the Fourth Branch of Government. We were not sleeping when this happened, we were wide awake. However, we were stunningly distracted by the economic collapse that was taking place in 2006 and 2007 when the engineers behind Obama started to assemble the design. By the time Obama took office in 2009, we sensed something profound was shifting, but we can only see exactly what shifted in the aftermath. The four pillars were put into place, and a new Fourth Branch of Government was quietly created.

As Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard has begun to take down the political surveillance system. Yesterday, it was announced that Tulsi Gabbard fired twenty of the “according to those familiar with the matter” people. Another ten from the group “who spoke on the condition of anonymity.” And seven of the “officials close to the issue.” Her work continues.

https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1958328737017254066

Read more …

All kinds of small-town politicians come up with rules and regulations that they insist apply to the entire world.

“..it came as no surprise that the administration stood (and still stands) firm alongside Cupertino in protecting Americans’ rights against British predations — with echoes of 1776.”

• Tulsi Stares Down UK, Scoring Another Big Win for American Consumers (Green)

The United Kingdom has a problem with the U.S.: It’s that pesky Bill of Rights and our refusal to surrender our rights to Britain’s censorship and due-process-busting domestic spying schemes. Enter, stage right: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. I reported earlier this week that 4chan’s notorious internet pranksters hired a couple of big-name law firms, after Britain threatened the American-based company with a £20,000 fine, followed by hefty daily fines, if the group failed to impose Britain’s censorship rules on 4chan’s users everywhere in the world — including in the U.S. 4chan’s representation called the actions of Britain’s Office of Communications (Ofcom) an “illegal campaign of harassment against American technology firms.”

But Britain’s censorious Online “Safety” Act of 2023 isn’t the only foreign threat to American freedoms. They also have their Orwell-inspired Investigatory Powers Act, which pitted His Majesty’s Craptaculent Government up against one of the biggest companies in the world: Apple. Back in February, Britain ordered Apple to create a backdoor in its iPhone operating system, allowing British authorities to snoop on the entire contents of anyone’s iPhone, anywhere in the world — without a warrant, without notification, without nothin’. Arguably worse, under the Investigatory Powers Act, Apple was forbidden to even tell British users that their privacy was compromised by force of law. Apple calls its end-to-end iPhone encryption — that means nobody can see your data but you — Advanced Data Protection (ADP), and they weren’t about to have some Limeys break it for a billion users around the world.

Britain’s hope was that Apple would quietly corrupt user privacy without anyone being the wiser, but rather than destroy user privacy, Apple did what I called “the best wrong thing.” Instead of giving London the key to every iPhone in the world, in February the company warned British users that they would soon lose ADP and their privacy, too. Apple explained that it would no longer offer ADP “to new users and current UK users will eventually need to disable this security feature.” That’s a terrible thing to have to do, but at least UK users weren’t lied to about the security of their cloud and on-device storage. “We are gravely disappointed that the protections provided by ADP will not be available to our customers in the UK,” the company explained, “given the continuing rise of data breaches and other threats to customer privacy. Enhancing the security of cloud storage with end-to-end encryption is more urgent than ever before.”

President Donald Trump and Apple CEO Tim Cook have worked closely together in the past, despite some yuge political differences. So it came as no surprise that the administration stood (and still stands) firm alongside Cupertino in protecting Americans’ rights against British predations — with echoes of 1776. Trump sicced Tulsi on the Brits. Wisely, after months of wrangling behind closed doors, the Brits finally caved. “Neither the U.S. nor U.K. governments have made any formal announcement about the matter,” Apple Insider reported, but “given the secretive way the U.K. has tried to handle the matter, there may not even be any confirmation on that side of the Atlantic.” We don’t yet know what went on between Trump, JD Vance, Gabbard, and their UK counterparts, but we can see the result.

“Over the past few months, I’ve been working closely with our partners in the U.K., alongside POTUS and VPOTUS,” Gabbard posted to X yesterday, “to ensure Americans’ private data remains private and our Constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected.” “As a result, the UK has agreed to drop its mandate for Apple to provide a ‘back door’ that would have enabled access to the protected encrypted data of American citizens and encroached on our civil liberties.” With that out of the way, Apple might be able to re-enable ADP for UK users, although that part remains unclear at the time of this writing. Regardless, Americans got a big win today, courtesy of Cupertino and the Trump White House.

Read more …

It’s time for Kash to come with concrete facts. People have only so much patience.

• FBI Director Kash Patel Outlines Current Status of FBI Reform Effort (CTH)

FBI Director Kash Patel appeared on Fox News Business with Larry Kudlow to discuss the current status of several FBI efforts, including the targeting of international terrorists. Within the interview, Director Patel notes there is an ongoing review of any/all information that surrounds the weaponized use of the FBI under previous leadership. Kudlow narrows in on the FBI raid to Mar-a-Lago, and digs down for details as to whether Patel is investigating the targeting of President Trump post 2020 election. In recent joint appearances with Kash Patel, there appeared to be frustration by President Trump as the Director waxed philosophically about the excellence of his agency while the American electorate looked on with great suspicion. Shortly thereafter came an announcement that Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey would be joining the FBI leadership team as a Co-Deputy Director. The current appearances by Director Patel follow the announcement of Bailey’s addition to the team.

Read more …

Martin would appear to have a broad agenda. Letitia, Schiff, Jan 6…

• Matt Gaetz Interviews Ed Martin On Adam Schiff, Jan 6 Committee (CTH)

Matt Gaetz is one of the few members of congress who reviewed the activity of the J6 Committee after it was disbanded. In this interview, Matt Gaetz discusses the activity of the J6 Committee with DOJ Working Group leader, Ed Martin. Ed Martin is now tasked with assembling all of the various information from open source, classified and declassified documents while reviewing them for potential criminal violations. Gaetz asks Martin whether any of the J6 activity is positioned to be a part of Ed Martin’s criminal activity review.

Read more …

I chewed quite a bit on the term “Previous History”. As in: what other kind is there?

• Previous History Indicates that War Is Our Future (Paul Craig Roberts)

Our time is much like Europe during 1912-1914 and 1938-1939. War is brewing, and unlike the earlier periods today the countries likely to be involved, with the exception of Russia, China, and Iran, are not trying to avoid it. Between 1912-1914 the French President Poincare, Russian Foreign Minister Izvolski, later Russian ambassador to France, and Russian Foreign Minister Sazonov were deeply involved in a conspiracy to cause a war between Russia and France (with British approval and involvement) on one side and Germany and Austria-Hungary on the other. Poincaire’s goal was to recover Alsace-Lorraine for France. The Tsar’s ministers wanted Constantinople in order to control the straits that are the entrance from the Black Sea into the Mediterranean. Harry Elmer Barnes tells the story based on the notes the conspirators wrote to one another over the years the conspiracy was prepared and put into operation.

For telling the truth, Barnes, a top of the line American historian, lost his position at Columbia University. The official narrative was that Germany caused the war, a claim for which there is zero evidence. But assigning historical blame to Germany kept attention off the French-Russian conspiracy. As Barnes own fate proved, it did not pay for a historian to tell the truth. The road to professional success was to create a narrative that justified the winners. And the “winners” were actually winners because the Germans were deceived, having foolishly trusted US President Wilson’s “Fourteen points.” The German emperor, a cousin of the British king and Russian Tsar, did everything he could to avoid war, and Germany was the last to mobilize. The country responsible for war is never the last to mobilize.

Both the Germans, the British, and possibly the Tsar were disadvantaged by being unaware of the French-Russian conspiracy for war. The assassination of the Austrian Archduke and Austria’s punitive response to Serbia, was turned by propaganda into the cause for war. Most likely, the assassination was a part of the French-Russian war plot. Regardless, a dispute between Austria-Hungary and Serbia ended up causing a war that killed millions of people in the major European powers and enabled Lenin to overthrow the Russian government. France got Alsace-Lorraine, and Russia got a revolution. Austria-Hungary was destroyed along with the German monarchy. The result was the Versailles Treaty that ensured World War II. The flower of the British leadership class was destroyed along with British financial strength. Turkey remained in control of Constantinople.

Barnes, like David Irving, bases his history on official documents, whereas most historians create a career for themselves by justifying the winners and aligning with the rising political, social, and economic forces. Izvolski arranged for Russian gold to be poured into bribes of French newspapers to silence war opponents, to make a case for war, and to bring Poincare into the French presidency. Russia also bribed leading Serbian politicians to engage in intrigues against Austria-Hungary. We are watching the same thing today, only we don’t know it. The media don’t tell us. They too are bribed. When we look at the American Witkoff and the nominal Russian Dmitriev, what is their real role? Could they be bribe makers whose job it is to produce outcomes that make their principles appear successful? One can hear the patriotic American’s disbelief: “Our country, never!”

But we know of the Clinton’s collection of bribes that have enriched their family. We know of the Hunter-Joe Biden collection of bribes and payoffs. Was the letter Trump’s wife had delivered to Putin about the alleged Ukrainian children the product of an Israeli bribe to get the focus off of Israel’s extermination of Palestinian children? As the realities of what is really underway are not exposed to the light of day, the populations in the US and Europe really have no idea what is going on. Commentators, depending on who is paying them, either spread optimistic hopes or allege Trump is selling out Ukraine. The reality is different.

The reality is that the world is headed into war because of (1) the US foreign policy imperative of American hegemony, and (2) the apparent problem the Russians have of putting themselves in the hands of their hopes instead of acknowledging reality. When a country’s foreign policy doctrine requires the prevention of the rise of any country that can serve as a constraint on its unilateralism, and there are rising countries, there can be no peace. In 1939 the British government gave a guarantee to Poland similar to the NATO guarantee the West wants to give Ukraine. The immediate consequence was World War II.

Read more …

“Independents and moderates understand instinctively what this means: a government so cynical it ignores its own laws in order to draw maps that guarantee one-party rule.”

• Scandal Threatens to Unravel Newsom’s Gerrymandering Power Grab (Margolis)

A group of California legislators is calling for the feds to step in after credible allegations that Gov. Gavin Newsom and his allies are orchestrating a brazen scheme to gerrymander California congressional districts. As we’ve previously reported here at PJ Media, Newsom has been promising to fight back against Texas Republicans’ controversial mid-cycle redistricting plan, which, of course, was done to offset Democrats’ blatant gerrymandering in blue states, which has inflated their representation in Congress. The problem is that California’s constitution flatly forbids mid-cycle redistricting, and the process for changing the system is no simple matter. Voters have already weighed in twice — in 2008 and 2010 — to strip politicians of their gerrymandering toys and hand the pen to an independent commission.

But now Newsom is bulldozing those safeguards voters established to boost his national profile before he runs for president. He plans to yank control away from the Citizens Redistricting Commission and back into the hands of his loyalist Democrats. Newsom looks less like a “progressive” reformer and more like a backroom operator addicted to power grabs. That’s why Assembly members Carl DeMaio, James Gallagher, Leticia Castillo, Heath Hadwick, David Tangipa, and State Sens. Tony Strickland and Marie Alvarado-Gil just fired off a formal request to the Department of Justice. Their letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi calls on the DOJ to investigate “corruption and violation of federal law” tied to Newsom’s redistricting scheme.

“We write to request that the US Department of Justice consider opening an immediate investigation into allegations of corruption and illegality involving members of the California state legislature and their current redistricting scheme,” the letter states. “As you may be aware, California state legislators — upon the Governor’s demand — have initiated an unprecedented and unnecessary mid-cycle redistricting effort. Article 21 of the California state constitution expressly prohibits such an effort and public opinion is solidly against the idea of mullifying the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and handing the power back to politicians to manipulate the lines of their own districts.” The letter continues:

“In recent days alarming allegations have surfaced that may explain why state legislators are proceeding forward with such a blatantly unconstitutional and politically unpopular proposal. Specifically, various media outlets are reporting that several members of the state legislature may have not only engaged in drawing the lines of these maps to benefit themselves politically but may be providing their vote for these proposals on the condition that the maps are drawn to benefit themselves. As just one example, KCRA reported that one powerful senator “had one of the new, targeted districts drawn specifically for him in exchange for his support of the redistricting plan.” This kind of backroom dealing and possibility for vote-trading by politicians is the very reason why California voters passed ballot initiatives in 2008 and again in 2010 to take redistricting powers away from the Governor and state legislature.

But here’s the key part right here: “We believe that the backroom dealings may rise to an unlawful level of bribery and vote trading. It is quite possible that federal laws could have been violated in the scheming surrounding these backroom deals over maps. Aside from possible criminal misconduct, we are also concerned with numerous potential violations of federal law related to the process of redistricting and the proposed maps being approved by the state legislature. Public confidence in the integrity of our state legislature is of paramount importance. As such we ask that you review this matter and determine whether a federal investigation is warranted at this time.”

If true, these accusations don’t merely flout the state constitution; they veer directly into federal criminal territory. Bribery, vote trading, the manipulation of congressional maps to benefit oneself politically: These aren’t just morally grotesque; they invite a Justice Department investigation for potential violations of election law. And for once, it’s not just Republicans raising the alarm. Independents and moderates understand instinctively what this means: a government so cynical it ignores its own laws in order to draw maps that guarantee one-party rule. Newsom may think he’s untouchable, but the demand for a DOJ probe suggests that the tide could be turning. If this investigation gains traction, the scheme designed to lock in permanent power for the left could unravel quickly for Newsom, for his allies, and for the illusion of accountability in Sacramento. The governor may soon learn that Californians don’t just oppose corruption; they’ve had more than enough of it.

Read more …

“Today, it’s all provocative bulls**t all the time. No responsibility. No accountability. You just move on to the next. And it gets us views, it gets us clicks, but it’s not getting us to a better place.”

• Chris Cuomo Declares the Democrat Party ‘Dead’ (Margolis)

Chris Cuomo, the brother of NYC mayoral candidate Andrew Cuomo, reflected on the state of the Democratic Party today during an interview with Benny Johnson on his podcast. There, he delivered a stark verdict: The Democratic Party is dead. Drawing on his personal political lineage, Cuomo pointed out a fundamental shift that has erased the party he once knew and fought for. “My brother’s a Democrat. I don’t know why, but he is. Uh, my father was a Democrat. I know exactly why he was, but his party doesn’t exist anymore,” Cuomo said. “And while I had disagreements with my father about different issues, I knew what principles were guiding him.” Cuomo recalled his father’s era, a time when the Democratic Party was distinctly focused on protecting the little guy and maintaining a balanced role for government.

“My father’s battle was against trickle-down economics and Reagan Republicanism,” he explained. “The Democratic Party that he fought for and the Republican Party that he fought against — neither exists anymore.” Cuomo described his father’s party as one that said, “Take care of the little guy, take care of the little guy, take care of the little guy. Stay out of our bedroom. Stay out of my heart. Just do all the government we need, but only the government we need. And we’re a secular society. Don’t put anything else on me.” According to Cuomo, his father’s Democratic Party embraced a capitalism that offered opportunity in a free market, rejecting socialism while supporting necessary public services like education and entitlements. He emphasized, “No Democrat ever argued for anything else. No Democrat would’ve argued for open borders. You know — none of this. My father would’ve done none of this.”

Discussing how politics has flipped since his father’s time, Cuomo noted that today’s left champions cultural elitism, dictating how people should speak and raise their children. Meanwhile, the Republicans have become anti-establishment champions for the little people trampled upon by the elites, a complete reversal from previous alignments. He said, “They flipped in terms of their operative animus and their constituencies out of convenience and time.” “So, my father’s party is no more,” Cuomo continued. “He believed that the opportunity to be part of a free market was exactly why his parents — illiterate, okay? Uh, unsophisticated, untrained except, uh, with a heart, you know, three sizes too big, filled with ambition and dreams — [came here], to be able to compete, you know? Without some feudal system on your head in rural Italy, where they were telling you who you could be and how you could be. [They believed that] was worth everything.”

When it came to the current chaotic and provocative political environment, Cuomo expressed deep frustration with the lack of responsibility and accountability. He lamented the constant push for controversy over constructive dialogue: “Today, it’s all provocative bulls**t all the time. No responsibility. No accountability. You just move on to the next. And it gets us views, it gets us clicks, but it’s not getting us to a better place.” Chris Cuomo is absolutely right about what the Democratic Party has become. It’s no longer even pretending to fight for the little guy. It exists to serve the coastal elites and their agenda. If Democrats ever cared about everydayAmericans, that was long ago and only for show. Now they thrive on outrage, scandals, and clickbait while ignoring the real problems facing the country. Cuomo’s blunt assessment simply confirms what millions of us already know: The Democratic Party has lost its way and turned its back on the very people it once pretended to represent.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Messerschmitt
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1958500458441429133

Judge Caprio died yesterday

Swan

Build a road to move a church
https://twitter.com/Rainmaker1973/status/1958480858978935039

200

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle August 6 2025 – 2

Aug 062025
 
 August 6, 2025  Posted by at 2:57 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  15 Responses »


Steve Schapiro Muhammad Ali (Cassius Clay) with mini gloves, Louisville, KY 1963

 

• Tulsi Gabbard Revokes Security Clearances (Maxwell)
• President Trump Threatens to Federalize DC After Attack On ‘Big Balls’ (CTH)
• ‘Big Balls’ Left Bloodied After DC Carjacking Attempt By 10 Minors (NYP)
• Letters and Documents Purposefully Leaked by Main Justice (CTH)
• Putin Meets With Trump Special Envoy Witkoff In Kremlin (RT)
• West Has ‘Unacceptable Control’ Over Ukraine – Former PM
• NATO Leaders ‘Do Whatever I Want’ – Trump (RT)
• Trump To ‘Substantially’ Raise Tariffs On India ‘Over The Next 24 Hours’ (RT)
• Global South Defies US Threats Over Friendship With Russia (Sp.)
• Brazil Defies US Dollar Dominance (Sp.)
• Israeli Settlers Attacked Russian Diplomats – Zakharova (RT)
• French Debt Ballooning By €5,000 A Second – PM (RT)

 

 

 

 

Gain of function monetary policy
https://twitter.com/TRUMP_ARMY_/status/1952815275985821748

https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1952710464195985913

Olympics
https://twitter.com/SaveUSAKitty/status/1952836925775319406

Nunes

https://twitter.com/atensnut/status/1952874945559618022

“NBC “News” segment on DOJ opening of Russiagate grand jury probe. The “reporter” apprises the viewer that:
– Russiagate is a distraction
– All Gabbard’s claims are unsubstantiated
– *RE-EMPHASIZES* There is zero evidence to back up claims
– It’s all politically motivated
– Trump just wants to attack his political foes
That’s the entire “report.” The level of deceptive propaganda here is on par with what legacy media did when running the original hoax. And everyone understands why.”

 

 

 

 

Two is too much. Each Debt Rattle already takes 12 hours of work on average. But I did it, infected eye and all.

 

 

 

 

X thread

“Let’s be blunt: These clearances were never about safety. They were about status. They used their “former official” labels to dominate cable news, build book deals, enrich themselves, and maintain backdoor access to power.”

• Tulsi Gabbard Revokes Security Clearances (Maxwell)

DNI Tulsi Gabbard has revoked the security clearances of Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger… and that’s just the beginning!!She’s also pulled clearances from:
– John Brennan, the former CIA Director who weaponized intelligence and misled the American public about the Steele dossier.
– James Clapper, former DNI, who swore under oath there was no mass surveillance of Americans — then got caught lying.
– Susan Rice, who “unmasked” U.S. citizens for political reasons during the Obama years.
– Jake Sullivan, Biden’s National Security Advisor, who helped peddle the fake Alfa Bank narrative to smear Trump.
– Victoria Nuland, the architect of several regime-change disasters and foreign policy failures.
– Eric Swalwell, who sat on the House Intelligence Committee while having romantic ties to a Chinese spy.
– Peter Strzok, disgraced FBI agent who vowed to “stop” Trump from winning while investigating him under false pretenses.
– Lisa Page, another key player in the partisan takedown attempts of a sitting president.
– Fiona Hill, who testified during impeachment while maintaining deep ties to anti-Trump institutions abroad.

Tulsi Gabbard is doing what no one else would dare do… finally shutting the door on the corrupt old guard who treated American intelligence like a private political weapon. These people abused their access. They leaked. They lied. They profited. And they used our national security institutions as tools of revenge and manipulation — not defense. Revoking their clearances isn’t just symbolic. It’s the start of a full reckoning. You don’t get to push lies about foreign collusion, spy on American citizens, help suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story, and then walk away with lifetime security access. That’s not how this republic works. At least, not anymore — thanks to Tulsi. Let’s be blunt: These clearances were never about safety. They were about status. They used their “former official” labels to dominate cable news, build book deals, enrich themselves, and maintain backdoor access to power.

Well, those doors just got slammed shut. Tulsi Gabbard is cleaning out the intelligence community like it’s never been cleaned before. And that’s why she’s in danger. Make no mistake: This move paints a massive target on her back. The people she just stripped of power aren’t just bitter — they’re dangerous. They’re part of a machine that doesn’t go quietly. These are the same forces who orchestrated the Russia hoax, buried the truth about the Wuhan lab, silenced dissent on COVID policies, and tried to break any leader who wouldn’t bow to their narrative. Pray for Tulsi Gabbard. She is standing alone in a storm of powerful enemies. The same elite circles that protected Epstein, buried Hunter’s laptop, and lied under oath are now coming for her. They know Tulsi can’t be bought, can’t be blackmailed, and won’t back down.

She’s not playing politics. She’s fighting for the soul of this country. And when someone does that — the deep state takes notice. And they retaliate. So I ask every patriot reading this: Pray for her safety. Pray for her protection. Pray that God covers her, her family, and those standing with her. Pray that the truth comes to light and that the American people have eyes to see it. This is a spiritual battle just as much as a political one. And Tulsi Gabbard is fighting it with unmatched bravery. The left called her a “traitor.” The media dismissed her as “dangerous.” The intelligence community feared her from the moment she stepped into office.

That should tell you everything you need to know. Tulsi Gabbard may be the most important leader in America right now. And she’s not acting out of vengeance — she’s acting out of duty. She’s trying to restore the very thing these corrupt players spent years destroying: the American people’s trust in government. And that’s why we must stand with her. Keep her in your prayers

Read more …

Give him one little nudge and he’ll do it.

• President Trump Threatens to Federalize DC After Attack On ‘Big Balls’ (CTH)

President Trump responded to a brutal attack on Edward Coristine, the DOGE employee known as “Big Balls.”

“Crime in Washington, D.C., is totally out of control. Local “youths” and gang members, some only 14, 15, and 16-years-old, are randomly attacking, mugging, maiming, and shooting innocent Citizens, at the same time knowing that they will be almost immediately released. They are not afraid of Law Enforcement because they know nothing ever happens to them, but it’s going to happen now! The Law in D.C. must be changed to prosecute these “minors” as adults, and lock them up for a long time, starting at age 14. The most recent victim was beaten mercilessly by local thugs.

Washington, D.C., must be safe, clean, and beautiful for all Americans and, importantly, for the World to see. If D.C. doesn’t get its act together, and quickly, we will have no choice but to take Federal control of the City, and run this City how it should be run, and put criminals on notice that they’re not going to get away with it anymore. Perhaps it should have been done a long time ago, then this incredible young man, and so many others, would not have had to go through the horrors of Violent Crime. If this continues, I am going to exert my powers, and FEDERALIZE this City. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” ~ President Donald Trump

Read more …

“President Trump posted a picture of the young man bloodied on a street.”

He does have balls. He’s also lucky: “The officers immediately exited their vehicle, and the juveniles began fleeing on foot..”

• ‘Big Balls’ Left Bloodied After DC Carjacking Attempt By 10 Minors (NYP)

A 19-year-old former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffer was beaten and bloodied by a mob of 10 minors early Sunday as he thwarted a carjacking attempt in the nation’s capital, according to DC police. Edward Coristine, whose LinkedIn handle earned him the nickname “Big Balls” at DOGE, was with a woman near downtown DC when he saw the group of juveniles approach their car and “make a comment about taking the vehicle,” according to a Metropolitan Police Department incident report obtained by The Post. “At that point, for her safety, [Coristine] pushed his significant other … into the vehicle and turned to deal with the suspects,” the dramatic report continues.

Edward Coristine stopped an attempted carjacking early Sunday, according to DC cops. “The suspects then began to assault [Coristine],” the ex-DOGE staffer told officers, who rolled up on the scene at the same time he was being attacked. Officers patrolling the 1400 block of Swann Street NW — a popular area with several shops, bars and restaurants about a mile north of the White House — noticed “a group of approximately ten juveniles surrounding the complainants’ vehicle and assaulting [Coristine],” the report states. “The officers immediately exited their vehicle, and the juveniles began fleeing on foot,” police said. DC police were able to nab only two of the young suspects, who were later positively identified by Coristine as being among his attackers. A 15-year-old male and a 15-year-old female, both from nearby Hyattsville, Md., were arrested and charged with unarmed carjacking.

Coristine was treated on scene by DC Fire and EMS for injuries sustained in the assault, according to DC police. He is recovering from a broken nose, concussion and black eye, according to a source familiar with the matter. The group of teenagers “shouted about taking the woman’s car, and then ran across the street,” just before they started to beat Coristine, a source said. Coristine then pushed his female companion into the driver’s seat and slammed the door. “The gang tried to open the closed doors and slammed [Coristine] against the car extremely loudly while attacking him,” the source added, noting that the woman called 911 from inside the vehicle while Coristine was being beaten. The software whiz also had his iPhone 16, valued at $1,000, stolen during the attack.

President Trump shared a photograph of the aftermath of the assault on Coristine early Tuesday afternoon, showing the former DOGE staffer sitting on the ground, bloodied and with his ripped shirt barely hanging on his body.[..] Marko Elez, a one-time colleague of Coristine’s at DOGE, claimed in a social media post that he snapped the photo of his friend shortly after the assault, and described his actions as heroic. “My friend Big Balls … is a hero,” Elez wrote on X. “I took this photo after Edward protected a young woman from an attempted carjacking by 8 thugs near Dupont Circle.” “Violence like this in the heart of DC is completely unacceptable.” Former DOGE chief Elon Musk also posted about the incident on X, without naming Coristine as the victim. Coristine resigned from DOGE in June, according to Fox News, less than a month after Musk departed from the agency.

Read more …

Sundance likes Tulsi. But not Pam Bondi.

• Letters and Documents Purposefully Leaked by Main Justice (CTH)

The entire grand jury process is extremely protected as the 5th amendment requires. Fullstop. Unfortunately, we have a long and painful history with the Trump-era Main Justice system, intentionally leaking information to satiate the MAGA base and tamp-down demands for reform and accountability. For seven years various Trump officials have claimed to be working to bring accountability. None has been delivered. Also unfortunately, the pattern of bread and circuses is repeating. The Dept of Justice leaked a letter to The Federalist, in order to affirm their performance.

Obviously, The Federalist is well aware of who the assigned “prosecutor” is. However, telling the audience that name does not support the ongoing ‘clickbait’ performance as orchestrated by Pam Bondi’s Dept of Justice. After all, there’s the important public opinion to be shaped. The DOJ sending this letter to journalist Sean Davis is a case study in exactly what ‘Bread and Circuses’ looks like. The DOJ providing this letter directly to The Federalist, indicates the purpose of Pam Bondi’s DOJ action is performative; not substantive. If the DOJ does not want to compromise their grand jury case, then why are they leaking their letters? Simply, think about it. The compromise and motive to note is not in the reporting per se’; it’s in the DOJ selective (purposeful) leaking. And in this example, it indicates a profound lack of seriousness.

It’s likely the DOJ knows the challenge of the case is a very high bar and they are unlikely to clear it. So, what they are doing is appeasing the ‘Russiagate’ crowd, with the performance of the investigation itself. However, this is a very dangerous approach to take given the nature of seven years of bread and circuses in the background. If the cases were perceived as solid and serious, there would be no reason for Pam Bondi’s DOJ to be leaking internal documents to Fox News, Mollie Hemmingway, John Solomon, Sean Davis or any other media outlet. Fox News originally broke the story of the Grand Jury after they were sent documents from Bondi’s authorization of a prosecutor to review evidence and empanel a grand jury.

Now Pam Bondi’s assigned prosecutor is sending copies of his/her letters to The Federalist. Does this sound like serious investigative action taken by serious Main Justice leadership? No, unfortunately it sounds like a profoundly unserious ‘tick-tock’ screenplay is being delivered, because that is exactly what these actions indicate. We have experienced seven-years of ‘tick-tocking’, and intentional leaks, orchestrated for a purpose other than truth and justice. We The People deserve better. If the DOJ is going to leak letters and documents to ‘CONservative’ media for clickbait excitement, the outlook for serious legal accountability is not good.

Read more …

Putin cannot change his point of view, or his policies. He’s reacting to a US-sponsored attack on Russians in the Donbass. Trump will have to move.

• Putin Meets With Trump Special Envoy Witkoff In Kremlin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has begun talks with Steve Witkoff, the special envoy of US President Donald Trump, according to footage released by the Kremlin.Witkoff, who has traveled to Russia multiple times in his role as special envoy, landed in Moscow earlier on Wednesday on what Trump has described as a make-or-break diplomatic mission. The US president has threatened buyers of Russian energy with secondary sanctions unless progress is made in resolving the Ukraine conflict. The Kremlin responded that demands for sovereign states to halt economic ties with Moscow have no legal basis.nSince taking office in January, Trump has reopened high-level diplomatic channels with Moscow, reversing the isolationist approach of his predecessor, Joe Biden.

The Trump administration has argued that engagement between the two nuclear superpowers is essential and could result in mutual benefits. Nevertheless, Trump has grown frustrated over the lack of swift results from his efforts to broker a peace deal, according to his public remarks. Moscow has maintained that it prefers diplomacy but will not allow the presence of a NATO-aligned adversary on its borders at the expense of national security. Kiev has continued to call on its Western backers to ramp up their military support and expand the sanctions on Russia. Some European governments have appealed to the US to sell them weapons to sustain shipments to Ukraine.

Read more …

“Ukraine is “not a failed state..” It’s not a state at all… It’s a colony..

• West Has ‘Unacceptable Control’ Over Ukraine – Former PM

Western control over Ukraine has reached “unacceptable” levels and is turning Ukraine into a “disenfranchised colony,” according to the country’s former prime minister, Yulia Timoshenko. The US and EU are using the ongoing conflict to “undermine” the nation’s sovereignty, she told The Times. In an interview published on Monday, Timoshenko claimed that Western experts play a key role in commissions appointing senior officials to Ukraine’s highest judicial bodies, including the Constitutional Court, the customs service, the State Bureau of Investigation, and various anti-corruption agencies. According to The Times, each of these commissions consists of three Ukrainian and three Western members, with the Westerners able to veto potential appointees through a joint vote.

In the event of a tie, the Western members’ votes carry more weight than those of the Ukrainians. British nationals are among those serving on the commissions, the paper noted. Since the escalation of the conflict between Moscow and Kiev, “Western countries – under the threat of withholding loans – have imposed unacceptable control over Ukraine’s state institutions,” Timoshenko said, calling such control “cruel and unjust.” Ukraine is “not a failed state,” and the US and its allies would do better to apply their oversight mechanisms in countries such as Afghanistan, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, Timoshenko, who leads the opposition Fatherland party’s faction in parliament, insisted.

She pointed to Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies as tools of Western control over Kiev and welcomed Vladimir Zelensky’s controversial attempt to curtail the autonomy of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) – two agencies established with Western support to tackle rampant graft in Ukraine – calling it a “bright day” for the country. Zelensky introduced the relevant legislation last month, but later withdrew it after the EU threatened to reduce financial support for Kiev. Moscow has described Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies as instruments of Western influence over the country’s internal affairs. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova recently claimed they were designed not to combat corruption, but to give Western governments leverage over Kiev.

Read more …

People who have no views of their own also contribute little of value.

• NATO Leaders ‘Do Whatever I Want’ – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has claimed that NATO leaders are now completely aligned with his agenda, and credited his leadership for what he described as a dramatic turnaround in America’s global standing.In an interview with CNBC on Tuesday, Trump said the US had gone from a “dead country” to “the hottest country anywhere in the world by far” within several months since his inauguration. “That was told to me by every leader of NATO, which they do whatever I want,” he said, claiming similar praise from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar.“I’m very happy to help,” Trump added.

Trump has for years pressured NATO members to ramp up defense spending while warning that the US would not defend countries that fall short of the bloc’s targets. At a key NATO summit in July, bloc members committed to increasing defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, up from the previous threshold of 2%. Trump also announced that the EU would pay the US “100% of the cost of all [American-made] military equipment” under a new funding deal, adding that “much of it will go to Ukraine.”

During the summit, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte referred to Trump as “daddy [who] has to sometimes use strong language,” after the US president compared Israel and Iran to children in a schoolyard fight and said “they don’t know what the f*ck they’re doing.” Trump was referring to the two countries trading accusations of violating a ceasefire in the 12-day war in June. The “daddy” remark raised eyebrows in the Western media, with critics accusing Rutte of “orchestrated groveling” and sycophancy while condemning the incident as “one of the most shameful episodes in modern history.” Rutte scrambled to defend his comments, insisting that Trump deserves praise and calling the US president a “good friend” who had “finally” persuaded European NATO members to boost defense spending.

Read more …

(A country of) 1.4 billion people will not budge.

• Trump To ‘Substantially’ Raise Tariffs On India ‘Over The Next 24 Hours’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump said on Tuesday that he will “substantially” raise tariffs on imports from India over the next 24 hours because of the South Asian’s continued purchases of Russian crude. The latest threat comes a day after India rejected US and EU criticism over its oil trade with Russia saying it would take measures to “safeguard its national interests and economic security,” while adding that the targeting of the South Asian nation was unreasonable. Calling India the “highest tariff nation,” the US President told CNBC Squawk Box in a phone interview that India has not been a good trading partner. “They do a lot of business with us but we don’t do with them. So, we settled on 25% but am going to raise them substantially in the next 24 hours because they’re buying Russian oil and they’re fueling the war machine,” Trump said in the interview.

In the 2024-25 fiscal year, bilateral trade between India and the US reached $131.8 billion, with a trade surplus of $41.18 billion for New Delhi, according to the Indian government. Trump also claimed in his Tuesday interview that New Delhi has offered to entirely waive tariffs on US imports. “Now I will say this, India went from the highest tariffs ever, they will give us zero tariffs. But that’s not good enough, because of what they’re doing with oil,” he said. Although the US President maintains that India is a friend, he has recently made a string of statements that are critical of New Delhi. On Monday, he said India was making “big profits” by selling Russian oil in the open market. “They don’t care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian war machine,” he said in a Truth Social Post on Monday.

***********
‘None of his business’ — ex-ambassador MK Bhadrakumar blasts Trump’s tariff threats to India”

Read more …

Their response? “Don’t rush into a fight you can’t win.”

• Global South Defies US Threats Over Friendship With Russia (Sp.)

Washington has declared a trade war on India, Brazil and China. Their response? Don’t rush into a fight you can’t win. Blasting Western hypocrisy and “unjustified & unreasonable” targeting, India’s MEA has vowed to “take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security.” The US’s 25% tariffs aren’t about “trade fairness,” but punishment for engaging Russia, says Dr. Hriday Sarma. But “India knows what its national interest is, and will not come under pressure,” stresses Prof. Rajan Kumar. The country has no plans to ban Russian oil. Just over the past weekend, at least 3 tankers delivered over 2.2M barrels of Russian crude to Indian ports.President Lula has similarly rejected US ultimatums, declaring Brazil would “negotiate as a sovereign country.”

And it’s little wonder: Brazil-US trade totaled about $92B last year, while trade with BRICS hit nearly $210B. The US tariff tantrum could also backfire. Amid Trump’s 50% tariff threats, a third of US coffee comes from Brazil. Meanwhile, China is welcoming Brazilian coffee with open arms. The selective approach (different tariffs for Brazil & India) is an attempt to create divisions within the BRICS bloc. Dr. Sarma says. But it won’t succeed “as shared strategic interests & a commitment to multipolarity bind the group together.” China has also rejected US demands to stop buying Russian oil. “China will always secure its energy supplies in ways that serve our national interests,” its foreign ministry said. “Coercion & pressuring will not achieve anything.”

“The US is discovering its old playbook of threats, tariffs & sanctions no longer guarantees compliance,” Dr. Sarma says. “Countries are weighing their options, & finding that meaningful engagement with BRICS partners offers more stability & mutual respect.” “Multipolarity is no longer theoretical; it’s unfolding in real time.”

Read more …

“BRICS Shield Against US Hegemony..”

• Brazil Defies US Dollar Dominance (Sp.)

President Lula da Silva says global trade must be free — without Washington’s currency stranglehold. What’s driving him? “President Lula will no longer accept unequal terms of trade and US intervention because the very nature of the international system has irreversibly changed,” Dr. Anuradha Chenoy, retired professor of Jawaharlal Nehru University, tells Sputnik. The US has imposed tariffs and pressured Brazil’s Supreme Court to drop cases against ex-President Jair Bolsonaro — Trump’s ally who refused to concede defeat. Many Brazilians see it as interference and a threat to sovereignty.

Brazil has BRICS partners to lean on. In July 2025, China — bolstered by its economic resilience — signed key cooperation deals with Brazil, covering everything from infrastructure to strategic development. Brazil-US trade totals around $92 billion, but BRICS trade is far larger. Brazil exports around $121 billion to BRICS — 35% of its total — while importing $88 billion. With stronger BRICS ties, Brazil has less need to depend on the US, says financial analyst Paul Goncharoff. Lula’s push for an alternative currency makes sense — sticking to the dollar means guaranteed loss in value. “There’s really no alternative for the world but to get out of the US dollar trap,” Goncharoff stresses.

The shift away from USD is only growing. PIX, Brazil’s free payment system, bypasses Western firms like Visa and Mastercard — empowering local entrepreneurs, Dr. Vinicius Vieira from the University of São Paulo tells Sputnik. “And that bothers Trump because those new technologies are a signal that the dollar empire may be coming to an end,” the pundit notes. The US acts desperately to resist its hegemonic decline, but no empire lasts forever. Just as the British pound fell, the US dollar may be facing the same fate. “The best that [Washington] could do is to offer honest agreements in order to preserve the minimum level of transactions of US dollars, instead of implying sanctions or what now we call a weaponized interdependence,” Vieira concludes.

Read more …

Putin will call Bibi: Make sure it doesn’t happen again.

• Israeli Settlers Attacked Russian Diplomats – Zakharova (RT)

Israeli settlers attacked a Russian diplomatic vehicle in the occupied West Bank last week, causing mechanical damage, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Tuesday. The vehicle was carrying members of Russia’s diplomatic mission to the Palestinian Authority, who are also accredited with Israel’s Foreign Ministry. Russia considers the incident, which occurred on July 30 near the illegal Israeli settlement of Giv’at Asaf, east of Ramallah and about 20 kilometers north of Jerusalem, a violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, according to Zakharova. She questioned the Israeli military’s failure to intervene, denouncing their inaction “particularly puzzling.”

“The Israeli Defense Force soldiers didn’t even bother to try and stop the attackers’ aggressive actions,” she said. “We regard this incident as a blatant violation of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations,” Zakharova said, adding that the Russian embassy in Tel Aviv has submitted an official note to the Israeli authorities. Last month, the Kremlin reiterated that the only solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies in the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. “Russia has always adhered to a two-state solution as the basis for resolving the Palestinian issue,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists.

Moscow’s recognition dates back to 1988, when the Soviet Union endorsed the Palestinian declaration of independence. The statement comes amid the conflict in Gaza, which began in October 2023 after a Hamas-led attack on southern Israel left around 1,200 people dead. Israel’s military response has since killed more than 59,000 Palestinians, according to the health authorities in the enclave, and has drawn global criticism for the scale of destruction and civilian casualties.

Read more …

It adds up, even more if you have no printing press.

• French Debt Ballooning By €5,000 A Second – PM (RT)

French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou is urging the public to back his drastic public spending cuts, warning that the country’s debt is growing by €5,000 ($5,784) every second. The €43.8 billion ($50.9 billion) deficit-cutting program unveiled last month targets a budget gap that hit 5.8% of GDP last year – nearly double the EU’s 3% limit. Bayrou has sounded the alarm, stressing that the debt load is a “mortal danger,” while insisting tough measures are now unavoidable. In a YouTube video posted on Tuesday, he sought to convince the public that the planned budget squeeze was essential to prevent a full-blown fiscal crisis.

”Our debt stands at €3.4 trillion – a figure so vast it’s hard to imagine,” he stated, warning that interest payments alone could reach €100 billion annually by 2029 if no action is taken. The proposals include scrapping two public holidays to boost productivity, cutting public sector jobs, and freezing welfare payments and pensions, which are typically indexed to inflation. The plan has sparked backlash, with left-wing parties accusing the government of prioritizing military spending over social welfare. Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of La France Insoumise, called for Bayrou’s resignation, saying “these injustices cannot be tolerated any longer.”

France’s military budget is set to rise to €64 billion in 2027 – twice its 2017 level. President Emmanuel Macron has pledged an extra €6.5 billion over the next two years, citing growing threats to European security. A recent defense review warned that a “major war” could break out by 2030, listing Moscow among the top threats. The Kremlin has dismissed claims it is planning to attack the West, accusing NATO of using Russia as a pretext for militarization. Bayrou, who has survived eight no-confidence motions, needs parliamentary backing for his proposals before the budget is presented in October. The right-wing National Rally party has rejected the plan and called for another vote on his government. A survey by pollster Elabe published on July 31 suggests that only 12% of the French people trust Bayrou – the lowest percentage since he became Prime Minister in December.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Optimus

Slaves

First time

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 26 2025

Jul 262025
 
 July 26, 2025  Posted by at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  64 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn The Angel Appearing to the Shepherds 1634

 

• Absolutely Not – Senators Want Special Counsel to Investigate Obamagate (CTH)
• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Reacts to former DNI James Clapper Hiring Lawyers (CTH)
• Barack Obama ‘Not Going to Be Indicted’ but There’s Good News (Margolis)
• Actually, Obama Can Be Indicted. Here’s Why (Margolis)
• Revenge or Justice? (Victor Davis Hanson)
• “Baseless?” (James Howard Kunstler)
• Zelensky’s Days are Numbered, He’ll Be the Ultimate Loser (Sp.)
• Out of Grace: Zelensky Loses US Backing: Larry Johnson (Sp.)
• Zelensky Broke The American Controls – and Now Faces The Consequences (RT)
• Putin-Zelensky Summit Only Possible To Finalize Peace Deal – Kremlin (RT)
• UK Could ‘Easily’ Stab US In The Back – Patrushev (RT)
• Trump Makes Alina Habba Acting US Attorney In NJ (ET)
• Israel Just Drew A New Map – Without Saying It Out Loud (Blade)

 

 

 

 

Nunes


Tulsi

Rebate


hack
https://twitter.com/LarryOConnor/status/1947628066974359870

judge
https://twitter.com/RodDMartin/status/1948560536066511060

 

 

 

 

Sundance points out that a special counsel is counterproductive, because it won’t have the cross-agencies (silos) powers that Tulsi has. Guess the fact that Lindsey Graham is the one asking for a special counsel, should alert us.

• Absolutely Not – Senators Want Special Counsel to Investigate Obamagate (CTH)

Senator Lindsey Graham (Judiciary Committee) and Senator John Cornyn (SSCI) are requesting Attorney General Pam Bondi to appoint a special counsel to look into the Obama administration’s weaponization of the U.S. Intelligence Community to target Donald Trump with fabricated smears and false evidence using a fraudulent Russia connection. This should be an immediate hard no for a few reasons. Number one, the special counsel process is where investigations go to die intentionally as a design of the legislative branch defense process. Second, the special counsel would not have cross-silo access to exfiltrate information unless it was accompanied by very specific Presidential authority. It just will not work. The intelligence community information that exposes the plot will be found in very distinct ‘silos’, essentially the intelligence agencies that house the information.

Additionally, inside each of the silos there is a formal and informal process to designate that information based on its internally defined national security value. An example of silo retention can be found in the issue of the FBI housing information in “prohibited access” files. These files are not even discoverable by most internal search efforts. Within the Sentinel system there are “Restricted Access” files that are used to control who can view the file information (sources and methods etc.). The FBI or investigative official (think authorized special counsel) can see the file but cannot access the information within it without a higher clearance level. In these files the Special Counsel can request access and then review. However, recently people discovered there are “Prohibited Access” files that makes the file invisible to both outside and inside searches or queries and are exclusively controlled by the FBI Director and FBI Deputy Director.

This is an example of a sub-silo (secret file keeping) within a distinct silo (FBI, Sentinel system). A special counsel would never discover the “prohibited” files, because there’s no way from outside the system to find it. It’s a little complicated but DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been finding, declassifying and releasing these ‘prohibited access’ types of information, because as Director of National Intelligence -her clearance and position- allow her to gain full administrative level access to the entire metadata of IC information. Tulsi can essentially log into all of the 18 intelligence agencies and review everything in the data storage system. A special counsel, regardless of authority, cannot do this. President Trump can demand full administrative access for himself and so can DNI Tulsi Gabbard. The rest of the silo administrators can only see the information inside their silo.

This limited access issue is how the intelligence agencies hide information. They rely on the inability of external reviewers to see the full scope and then cross reference to all other silos using the same terminology, data points and search sequences.

EXAMPLE – Making up an operational name like “Zero Footprint“, when DNI Tulsi Gabbard is looking at that operation, she can see the full scope of information related to Zero Footprint as the information goes from the White House (finding memo) to the CIA, to the State Dept, to the Pentagon, to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), possibly to the Joint Chiefs and then beyond to international partners (whole or part information shared). DNI Gabbard can see the entire continuum, cross reference each step in the process, see who handled the organization, communication, logistics, assignments and track each process, which enables her to map the inputs and outcomes along with the timeline. She can even see the briefings (or lack therein) to the Gang of Eight or PDB as they are recorded.

A special counsel has nowhere near this capacity. In the example above, the research required to find, extract, cross-reference, organize and then assemble the totality of all information related to such a large intelligence operation (fyi, Zero Footprint was real), takes a lot of time and effort. Tulsi Gabbard is able to designate very specific aides to assist in this process, but the demand on her time is extreme even with help. DNI Gabbard recently told Fox News (video below) she was/is using AI as a tool to do autonomous spider crawls through the various silos looking for information that pertained to specific points, phrases, times, dates and people within the 18-agency silo system. Hundreds of thousands of “return positive” files must then be sifted and reviewed for connection to the participants, and again timelines become the key.

This is a big shift in the use of AI data search engine capability within the national security information space; however, it is exactly what I have been talking about for the past several years as I traveled back and forth to DC. Now, keep in mind what I am describing above is “non-public” information. If you want to really understand the insanity of how the silos operate, you need to accept the same filing and hiding system exists even within public information. The congressional staff don’t even know what the other congressional staff are doing with information from within two different committees, like the Senate Judiciary Committee (FISC oversight) and the Senate Homeland Security Committee (DOJ-NSD), or Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (FBI – Cointel).

In essence, there is little to no information sharing within the silo process, even within the guys on the “same team,” and making matters worse sometimes a research team can gain information that is much more pertinent to the other guys looking at similar issues from within another silo. Discovering this is beyond frustrating; however, it does explain how independent researchers who share on open-source crowd sharing platforms can walk down a research trail much faster. Bottom line, a Special Counsel is an exercise in futility, unless that special counsel has the same review and extraction capability as President Trump and/or DNI Tulsi Gabbard. The best option is a team of investigators within Tulsi Gabbard’s office to continue the digging and connecting the information; then share the discoveries with DOJ officials. Previously, I said a small group within the National Security Council might also be able to deliver a similar outcome. Lastly, a tip-line allowing the private sector crowdsourcing to push puzzle pieces toward the research team might also be a big help.

Read more …

“Our representatives were never representing us. The true DC enemy is ‘We The People‘..”

• DNI Tulsi Gabbard Reacts to former DNI James Clapper Hiring Lawyers (CTH)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard appears with Greta Van Susteren to discuss the ongoing release of Intelligence Community documents showing how President Obama intelligence officials conspired to manufacture a false intelligence assessment, frame Donald Trump and begin the Trump-Russia narrative. At the end of this trail of manufactured evidence, we will inevitably end up at the Robert Mueller investigation. The continuum of the Trump-Russia narrative starts with Hillary Clinton (Fusion GPS, Perkins Coie), then transfers to the FBI (James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok); which includes the DOJ National Security Division (AG Lynch, DAG Yates, Mary McCord), then goes through the backdoor to Barack Obama (Susan Rice, Lisa Monaco) and the Legislative Branch (SSCI), and eventually elevates with DNI James Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan manufacturing the 2017 intelligence product.

All of that collective effort, all of the former created inputs, eventually culminates into the Robert Mueller Special Counsel (Andrew Weissmann) and the Lawfare ideologues charged with upholding the manufactured premise. In my opinion, the greatest legal exposure is going to be with the Mueller team because that group intentionally and purposefully knew the information being received was fraudulent – yet they used it anyway. Keep in mind that John Durham laid the Mueller/Weissmann probe naked to their enemies. Unfortunately, Weissmann and Mueller do not have enemies in Washington DC, amid any party {. Our representatives were never representing us. The true DC enemy is ‘We The People‘ – and we choose to fight them. When Robert Mueller (silo 2) appeared before a congressional committee in June 2019 to answer questions about his Russia election interference report, he was asked about the origination of Trump-Russia.

Mueller’s jaw-dropping response was, “That was not in my purview.” Wait, how can your existence be predicated on investigating Trump-Russia, and yet the origin of Trump-Russia is not in your “purview”? See the problem?!

Read more …

The Supreme Court created a lot of leeway for what a president does in his official capacity. In what capacity did Obama sonspire against Trump?

• Barack Obama ‘Not Going to Be Indicted’ but There’s Good News (Margolis)

Thanks to the evidence already released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, it’s now clear that Barack Obama engaged in corrupt efforts to sabotage President Trump. And we’re likely just scratching the surface. More damning revelations are almost certainly on the way. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean Obama will ever see the inside of a courtroom, let alone a jail cell, even if he deserves it. But don’t confuse a lack of prosecution with vindication. During a recent appearance on Real America’s Voice, investigative journalist John Solomon joined Steve Bannon to unpack the formation of a new Department of Justice Strike Force reportedly focused on unraveling the criminal conspiracy behind the Russia collusion hoax and the government’s weaponization against President Trump. And while Obama’s fingerprints are all over the operation, Solomon made it clear that a formal indictment is highly unlikely.

“What the team will do is they’ll bring in all the different skill sets,” Solomon explained. “I think the National Security Division will be brought in. Ironically, that’s the same division that pursued Donald Trump on the classified documents but took a dive on Joe Biden’s.” According to Solomon, this newly formed strike force is modeled after the methods used to break down organized crime families. The process will focus on collecting “overt acts of the conspiracy,” then analyzing the timeline to determine whether the statute of limitations applies or if charges can be brought due to long-hidden evidence. Grand juries, subpoenas, and strategic interviews are all expected. “There’ll be lots of work and then there’ll be grand jury subpoenas. There’ll be significant interviews going on,” Solomon said. “You’ll look for your cooperating witnesses.”

The goal? Reel in the smaller fish first. “One of the things that they do is they roll up people on the low end of the scale early, and then they try to get them to turn on their bosses and get us the truth,” he said. It’s the same strategy that brought down mob bosses and drug kingpins, and now it’s being turned inward, toward the deep state.Names like John Brennan and James Comey are among those believed to be in the DOJ’s crosshairs. But then came the elephant in the room: Barack Obama. “If the ultimate targets are someone like a John Brennan or … James Comey or Barack Obama — who, by the way, is not going to be indicted. Anyone who thinks Barack Obama’s going to be indicted: it’s not going to happen,” Solomon admitted.

That legal shield, ironically, may come courtesy of Donald Trump himself. “President Trump’s immunity victory last year in the Supreme Court’s gonna protect Barack Obama. Barack Obama should send a thank-you card to Donald Trump,” Solomon quipped. But while Obama may avoid prosecution, that doesn’t mean he’s off the hook entirely. “You could imagine a scenario where they lay out a conspiracy, and Barack Obama is named as an unindicted co-conspirator,” Solomon continued. “That would be one hell of a legacy for the 44th president.” Indeed, while Obama will almost certainly avoid legal consequences, the political and historical fallout could be devastating. If he’s officially named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to frame his successor, and the people who carried out that plot end up in prison, his legacy won’t just take a hit; it’ll be permanently disfigured. It’s hard to claim innocence when everyone who did your bidding goes down for the crime.

A scenario like that isn’t something CNN or MSNBC can memory-hole, no matter how hard they try. No, Barack Obama won’t be frog-marched out of his Martha’s Vineyard mansion. But if this investigation follows through, the myth of his “scandal-free” presidency could collapse under the weight of a conspiracy that once masqueraded as patriotism but now reeks of abuse, corruption, and cover-up. Obama may not go to jail, but history may render its own indictment.

Read more …

SCOTUS: “The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law.”

• Actually, Obama Can Be Indicted. Here’s Why (Margolis)

This week, investigative journalist John Solomon told Steve Bannon that despite all the evidence that has been declassified linking Barack Obama to the Russiagate hoax, Obama won’t and can’t be indicted for his role in the Russian collusion hoax. “Anyone who thinks Barack Obama’s going to be indicted: It’s not going to happen,” Solomon admitted. “President Trump’s immunity victory last year in the Supreme Court’s gonna protect Barack Obama. Barack Obama should send a thank-you card to Donald Trump.” But is Solomon right? The case Solomon is referring to, Trump v. United States (2024), was, of course, extremely consequential, but also widely misunderstood. Democrats branded the ruling as the Supreme Court granting “blanket immunity” for presidents, but that’s not what it does at all.

While the Court recognized a degree of immunity for official acts of the presidency, it drew a sharp line between what a president does in his constitutional role and what he does as a private individual or political actor. From the ruling itself: “It is these enduring principles that guide our decision in this case. The President enjoys no immunity for his unofficial acts, and not everything the President does is official. The President is not above the law.” With that in mind, the ruling does not give presidents the power to break the law with impunity. If a president lies to federal investigators, commits fraud, or abuses power outside the scope of his official duties, he can still face prosecution. The Court explicitly left the door open for criminal charges—even against sitting or former presidents—if the conduct in question was personal, political, or unrelated to the legitimate functions of the presidency.

And, let’s be honest: What Barack Obama did during the Russian collusion hoax wasn’t just political—it was a calculated abuse of power far outside the bounds of his official role. If a president lies to federal investigators, forges documents, or uses the office for personal or political revenge, those are not protected actions. He can be charged under the same criminal statutes as anyone else. For example, 18 U.S.C. § 1001 makes it a crime to lie to federal officials. Wire fraud, under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, covers schemes involving deceit through electronic communication. Other statutes—like aiding and abetting (18 U.S.C. § 2), being an accessory after the fact (18 U.S.C. § 3), or even seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C.§ 2384)—can all apply if the president helps orchestrate or cover up unlawful acts.

That brings us to the documents released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, which suggest Barack Obama may have done exactly that. The material is nothing short of explosive. It confirms that Obama’s inner circle—including James Clapper and John Brennan, under Obama’s direction—engineered a political smear campaign disguised as an intelligence assessment. According to the files, a high-level meeting in December 2016, led by Obama’s top national security officials, launched the coordinated leaks to the media about so-called Russian election interference—even though pre-election intelligence assessments found no such evidence.

“The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment,” Gabbard stated. So obviously, the evidence suggests Obama is not innocent. The only real question now is whether he’ll ever be held accountable—or if the system will once again protect one of its own. That’s an entirely different question.

Read more …

“Obama-era officials and Clinton-campaign activists destroyed President Trump’s own credibility to sustain a workable relationship with a nuclear Russia..”

• Revenge or Justice? (Victor Davis Hanson)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just released a trove of apparently once-classified documents — with promises of much more to follow. The new material describes the role of the Obama administration’s intelligence and investigatory directors — purportedly along with former President Barack Obama himself — in undermining the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. In addition, their efforts extended to sabotaging the 2016-2017 presidential transition and, by extension, the first three years of the Trump presidency. The released documents add some new details to what over the last decade has become accepted knowledge. Congressional committees, special prosecutors, and the inspectors general had all previously issued reports that largely confirmed the general outlines of the skullduggery that began in 2015-16.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign, later aided by the top echelon of the FBI, CIA, and the Director of National Intelligence, sought — falsely — to seed a narrative that Trump had colluded directly with Russia to win unfairly the 2016 election. When that campaign gambit failed to alter the 2016 results, the Obama administration doubled down during the transition to undermine the incoming Trump presidency. Next, Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “all-star” legal team found no evidence of direct Trump-Putin collusion to hijack the election. But his investigation did sabotage 22 months of Trump’s first term, marked by constant leaks and hysterical rumors that Trump was soon to be convicted and jailed as a “Russian asset.” By 2020, the frustrated intelligence agencies and former “authorities” now absurdly further lied that Hunter Biden’s incriminating laptop had “all the earmarks” — once again — of Russian interference.

So, what could be new about Gabbard’s latest release? One, after the 2016 election of Donald Trump but before his inauguration, Obama convened a strange meeting with his outgoing intelligence and investigatory heads — CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, and a few others. Contrary to a four-year Democratic Party narrative that “18 intelligence agencies” had long claimed Russian collusion, the top directors apprised Obama that their expert colleagues had found no such evidence of Trump-Putin collusion. Yet outgoing President Obama allegedly directed them to ignore such an assessment. Instead, they began spreading narratives that President-elect Trump had been colluding with the Russians. Leaks followed. Media hysteria crested. And soon Mueller and his left-wing “dream team” of lawyers targeted President Trump.

Further new information may confirm that Brennan’s CIA — and those he briefed in the Oval Office — had known for some time that the Russians themselves were confused about why they were falsely being accused of colluding with Trump to rig the election. Of course, Russian operatives, like their Chinese counterparts, often seek to cause havoc in American institutions, such as hacking emails or spreading online disinformation. But they may have been nevertheless curious why Hillary Clinton was making such false accusations that they were working directly with Trump, and why the Obama administration was acting upon them. Obama has now claimed these new charges are outrageous and beneath the dignity of the presidency. He did not, however, flatly contradict the new information. He should have issued an unambiguous denial that he had never ordered his intelligence chiefs in December 2016 to ignore their associates’ assessments and instead to assume Trump’s collusion with Putin.

These sustained efforts of the Clinton campaign, Obama appointees, and ex-intelligence chiefs and their media counterparts between 2015 and 2020 severely undermined the 2016 Trump campaign. They bushwhacked the 2017 presidential transition. They hamstrung the Trump presidency. And they may well have hurt Trump’s 2020 election bid. Summed up, here is the damage caused by the Trump-Putin collusion lies: 1. They emboldened “experts” in 2020 to again lie blatantly and shamelessly to the American people that the incriminating Hunter Biden laptop was yet another fake product of Russian interference to help reelect Trump. 2. The media were equally guilty. Journalists partnered with current and ex-Obama appointees by disseminating fake documents like the Steele dossier and working with giants like Twitter and Facebook. During the 2020 campaign, the FBI and social media sought to censor accurate news stories that the laptop was indeed authentic and already verified as such by the FBI.

3. These operations may have had serious consequences for U.S. foreign policy. Dictatorial Russia is an adversary of the U.S. But by needlessly and falsely claiming that Russia had intervened in two elections directly to partner with Trump, Obama-era officials and Clinton-campaign activists destroyed President Trump’s own credibility to sustain a workable relationship with a nuclear Russia. In addition, the lying and extra-legal operations of the FBI and CIA only further convinced the paranoid Russians that they could not trust the U.S. government — given it had been engaging in the very conspiracy lies that were more akin to its own than America’s. Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and others will likely never face legal consequences for the damage they’ve done to our institutions and foreign policy. But that does not mean they should be exempt from an ongoing and disinterested effort to find and finally expose the whole truth.

Read more …

“If you can arrest a former president named Donald Trump, you can arrest a former president named Barack Obama.” — Peachy Keenan on “X”

• “Baseless?” (James Howard Kunstler)

Don’t you think it’s time for The New York Times to stop using the cliché “baseless” when referring to allegations — now, actually, official accusations— of the seditious conspiracy to run President Trump out of office after the 2016 election? Of all the fake “journalistic” blurts emanating from this bastion of degenerate sell-outs, “baseless” is the fakest, as if the word printed in a headline were so magically potent, the sheer assertion of it can make all your problems just — poof! — go away. It’s the thought process of wicked children who fail to develop a sense of true or false, right or wrong, who grow into adults specially licensed, by some new perversion of the social contract, to get away with anything. And those wicked children have become America’s managerial class, the elite who are supposed to do your thinking for you op-ed style, the credentialed experts, such as Tony Fauci, “economist” Paul Krugman, DEI avatar and NPR honcho Katherine Maher, Harvard law prof Lawrence Tribe. . . the list is interminable, but you get the picture.

This class is also the owner / operator of America’s political Deep State, which by 2016 had grown into a colossal racketeering operation, money-laundering gazillions of taxpayer dollars into NGOs dedicated to the country’s cultural and political destruction while it processed campaign donations into fantastic fortunes for people officially earning less than $200-K a year. The racket also managed to pay for the support of multitudes allergic to working for living, as long as they were available for riots and ballot-harvesting drives. It was working at such a high pitch by the end of Barack Obama’s two terms, with the most stupendously privileged creature in the Boomer bestiary ready to take her “turn” in the Oval Office — after amassing a $300-million-plus fortune serving as US senator (salary, $174-K / year) and Secretary of State (salary $199,700 / year, then) — that you must imagine the mighty freak-out at the prospect of one Donald John Trump, outsider vulgarian extraordinaire, promising to step in and drain the whole massive, putrid, necrotic, parasitical nepo-infested quagmire of predatory grifters, leaving them gasping for their lives on the stinking Potomac mudbanks like so many grunions dying on the beach at Redondo.

Barack Obama, apparently, Darth Vadar-ized himself and was handed a light-saber (Hillary’s Steele dossier) by John Brennan, Grand Duke of Planet Intel. . . and the rest should have been history — but instead festered in the US body politic for more than ten years like an inflamed tuberculoma and is now bursting out of the Beltway’s peritoneal cavity in a spectacular spray of ordure, sticking to everyone and everything like a thousand tails pinned on the everlasting Democratic donkey. Alas, Babylon-on-the-Potomac. . . . Also: “baseless,” my ass. . . . The basis for all this mischief is in the process of having proof supplied by the one figure, DNI Gabbard, in a position to retrieve the evidence, in writing, from the various heavily ring-fenced agencies over which she is the ultimate overseer, which has not been done before, especially back in the crucial weeks of late 2020 when John Ratcliffe was in that position. The reason Tulsi succeeded this time where Ratcliffe did not is probably due to newly available A-I systems which make collation of cross-searches much easier through the countless servers of the many intel agencies. And so, now it pours forth day by day.

That’s where things stand and the dust has not even begun to settle, with former President Obama seemingly hoisted on the petard of his own making back in December of 2016. Whether or not all the declassified info can be crafted into prosecutable cases is not yet determined, but you might imagine it will come together soon enough, if at all possible. It may not add up to treason per se, but there are plenty of other serious charges generally proceeding from deprivation of rights under color of law (18 U.S.C. § 242), to seditious conspiracy, i.e., overthrow of the president (18 U.S.C. § 2384) to stuff a number of former officials into orange jumpsuits behind bars.

Read more …

“The longer that Zelensky holds on and continues the fight with the encouragement of the West, he’s going to lose more and more..”

• Zelensky’s Days are Numbered, He’ll Be the Ultimate Loser (Sp.)

“Russians hold all the cards. Zelensky has no cards. All he can do is play games and placate Trump,” says Michael Maloof, former senior security policy analyst in the US Office of the Secretary of Defense, in an interview with Sputnik. According to Maloof, Zelensky is stalling for time, hoping to paint Russia as an unreliable negotiator and gain favor with Trump. The Kremlin, however, has stated that any Putin-Zelensky talks are premature, as no common ground exists yet. “The longer that Zelensky holds on and continues the fight with the encouragement of the West, he’s going to lose more and more,” Maloof warns.

Zelensky is also facing unrest at home. On July 22, Ukrainians protested his attempt to take control of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO). “I think the internal strife is going to have to be accelerated to the point where [Zelensky] is going to have to focus all of his attention on that if he intends to survive politically. But I think his days are numbered,” says Maloof. He suggests that Ukrainians may soon act to “get what’s left of Ukraine back on a stable footing with proper governance and representation.”

“Right now, the Russian perspective is that Zelensky is not a valid leader because his term had expired as president and he’s operating under martial law,” the analyst points out. Western support is also faltering, particularly after Zelensky’s controversial NABU/SAPO law, which contradicts the 2015 Ukraine–US–EU agreement on governance and foreign oversight. The West still holds financial leverage over Ukraine, while “the ultimate loser in the end will be Zelensky,” Maloof concludes.

Read more …

“There is nothing that Zelensky can point to where he can say, hey, I’ve got great support here, and I’m in good favor with Washington..”

• Out of Grace: Zelensky Loses US Backing: Larry Johnson (Sp.)

Volodymyr Zelensky is facing his first wave of mass protests since 2022 — and it’s a bad omen for him, veteran ex-CIA and State Department official Larry Johnson tells Sputnik. The trouble has brewed for the past month, according to the pundit. “We had a news article by Seymour Hersh… that indicated that his sources from the CIA and Department of Defense were telling him that Zelensky was on his way out, that they’re going to get rid of him,” Johnson says. Johnson says the first impression is the protests looked staged: Pre-printed signs, some oddly in English, while Ukrainians mostly speak either Ukrainian or Russian.

Protested Zelensky’s power grab over the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), but not forced conscription, or the failure to return bodies and pay families who have lost loved ones in the war. “The fact that there are rumors circulating that Washington wants to get rid of Zelensky is a sign that the relationship is not what it was two years ago under Biden,” the CIA veteran says. Zelensky tried to appoint his ex-Defense Minister Rustem Umerov as ambassador to the US, but Washington rejected it. Despite promises, Trump has no weapons to send — just deals to sell arms to Europe to pass to Ukraine. Signs show the US has grown tired of Zelensky. “There is nothing that Zelensky can point to where he can say, hey, I’ve got great support here, and I’m in good favor with Washington,” Johnson concludes.

Read more …

If anyone wants to get rid of anyone else in Kiev, they just accuse them of corruption and embezzlement. Can’t miss.

• Zelensky Broke The American Controls – and Now Faces The Consequences (RT)

On July 22, large-scale demonstrations broke out in major Ukrainian cities – Kiev, Lviv, Kharkov, and Odessa – and continue to this day. The protests erupted after the Verkhovna Rada (the Ukrainian Parliament) approved a law limiting the authority of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), effectively placing them under the control of the Office of the Attorney General. This legislation came shortly after NABU and SAPO launched an investigation into former Deputy Prime Minister Aleksey Chernyshov, one of Zelensky’s closest allies. Officials in Zelensky’s Office claimed that the reform was necessary to improve coordination among government bodies amid ongoing military operations and to combat Russian influence over anti-corruption institutions.

However, public outrage stemmed not only from the law itself but also from the rapid centralization of power in Ukraine. Protests persisted even after Zelensky restored the independent functioning of NABU and SAPO. Below, RT explores the motives behind the dismantling of these anti-corruption agencies and why the protests pose a threat to Zelensky’s administration. When Vladimir Zelensky took office in 2019, he vowed to support anti-corruption efforts, urging anti-corruption agencies to investigate all cases and hold even high-ranking officials accountable. However, those promises were never fulfilled. On July 22, the Rada passed Bill No. 12414, originally addressing amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code related to disappearances of people during wartime.

However, MPs from Zelensky’s Servant of the People party added amendments that effectively restructured NABU and SAPO, placing them under the control of the Attorney General, who is appointed by the president. Notably, many MPs who voted in favor of the bill and received it with applause are themselves under investigation by these anti-corruption bodies. The official justification for targeting NABU and SAPO was the investigation into Chernyshov, a presidential ally considered a candidate for prime minister, who faced allegations of abuse of power and illicit enrichment. A major corruption scandal in the construction sector emerged, making Chernyshov the highest-ranking official within the president’s team to be embroiled in such an inquiry.

According to the publication Ukrainskaya Pravda, Zelensky ordered the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) to protect Chernyshov from arrest. Despite the allegations, the court did not suspend him from his post; however, he was eventually dismissed, and the ministry disbanded. Another notable case involves NABU’s investigation into Rostislav Shurma, the former deputy head of the President’s Office. After the case was initiated, he fled to Germany. In July, German authorities, in collaboration with NABU, conducted a search of his residence in the suburbs of Munich. NABU was preparing charges against Timur Mindich, a long-time friend of Zelensky and co-owner of Studio Kvartal-95, Ukrainskaya Pravda reported. He is suspected of embezzlement in the energy sector and drone production.

Sources indicate detectives may possess recorded conversations involving Mindich in which Zelensky is mentioned. These cases involving the Ukrainian leader’s close associates triggered the crackdown on the anti-corruption agencies. This narrative has been confirmed by The Times and The Economist. On July 21, the SBU and prosecutors conducted extensive searches related to NABU employees, targeting over 80 locations nationwide. Law enforcement acted aggressively, using armed groups to force people to the ground without presenting search warrants. Later, the agency reported the detention of Ruslan Magomedrasulov, the head of NABU’s regional office. Investigators claim his father is a Russian citizen, and he failed to disclose this before obtaining access to state secrets. Allegedly, he assisted his father in conducting business in Russia, and his mother reportedly receives a pension from the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) and “makes pro-Russian comments” online. He is expected to face charges for “aiding Russia.”

Read more …

Putin already has a job. He can’t go sit at a table for endless negotiations.

• Putin-Zelensky Summit Only Possible To Finalize Peace Deal – Kremlin (RT)

A summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky should only take place to finalize a peace settlement, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Zelensky has repeatedly called for a face-to-face meeting with Putin in the past several months. The Ukrainian delegation has also proposed the idea during rounds of bilateral talks in Istanbul, framing such a summit as essential to ending the conflict. While the Kremlin has not ruled out a possible Putin-Zelensky meeting, Russian officials have consistently emphasized that the groundwork must be laid first.

“A summit meeting can and should put a final point in the settlement and record the modalities and agreements that are to be developed in the course of expert work. It is impossible to do the opposite,” Peskov told reporters on Friday. Following the third round of Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul this week, the Kremlin spokesman accused Kiev of prematurely pushing for a summit. “They are trying to put the cart before the horse,” Peskov said, stressing that “work needs to be done, and only then can the heads of state be given the opportunity to record the achievements that have been made.” Moscow has consistently pointed to concerns about Zelensky’s legal authority.

While Russia has stated it is open to negotiations with him, officials have warned that any documents signed under Zelensky’s name could face legal challenges in the future. Zelensky’s presidential term expired in May 2024. He has refused to hold new elections, citing the ongoing state of martial law in Ukraine. Russia has argued that his status as head of state is no longer valid and that legal authority in Ukraine now lies with its parliament. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has suggested that Zelensky’s insistence on meeting both Putin and US President Donald Trump may be aimed at getting “a massive legitimacy boost” and using the meetings as a pretext to further delay elections.

Read more …

“The United Kingdom would not hesitate to sabotage a potential thaw in US-Russia relations..”

• UK Could ‘Easily’ Stab US In The Back – Patrushev (RT)

The United Kingdom would not hesitate to sabotage a potential thaw in US-Russia relations, a top aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed on Friday. Nikolay Patrushev, a longtime national security official and senior Kremlin adviser, accused London of being prepared to carry out a false flag in order to derail efforts by US President Donald Trump to resolve the conflict in Ukraine and normalize ties with Moscow. “If necessary, London would easily stab Washington in the back. I believe officials in the White House realize what kind of ‘ally’ they are dealing with,” Patrushev told RIA Novosti.

His comments followed a statement last month by Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR), which alleged that British intelligence was directly involved in orchestrating covert Ukrainian operations. The SVR claimed the UK had acquired torpedoes of Soviet and Russian design for potential use in a false flag incident – specifically, a staged attack on an American naval vessel in the Baltic Sea. Since Trump’s return to office in January and the departure of Joe Biden’s Democratic administration, Russian officials have frequently pointed to London as the primary force behind the continued conflict in Ukraine. They argue that the British government’s firm support is an obstacle to peace and a strategic effort to block reconciliation between Washington and Moscow.

Moscow has portrayed the Ukraine conflict as a NATO-driven proxy war meant to weaken Russia at the expense of Ukrainian lives. Past reporting by The New York Times and The Times of London has confirmed that both US and British officials have played more active roles in directing Ukrainian military strategy than publicly acknowledged by their governments.

Read more …

Why did the U.S. district court judges of New Jersey refuse Habba and pick her assistant? i haven’t seen a single reason. Just because they could?

• Trump Makes Alina Habba Acting US Attorney In NJ (ET)

President Donald Trump withdrew his nomination of Alina Habba to serve as New Jersey’s top federal prosecutor, a Justice Department official confirmed on Thursday. The development comes after a federal court declined to retain Habba in the role of U.S. attorney for New Jersey and opted to install Desiree Leigh Grace. On Tuesday, U.S. district court judges of New Jersey selected Grace, who was Habba’s first assistant, to serve as U.S. attorney as Habba’s 120-day term in the office was reaching its end. Attorney General Pam Bondi then fired Grace in response to the judges’ decision. “[Habba] has been doing a great job in making NJ safe again. Nonetheless, politically minded judges refused to allow her to continue in her position, replacing Alina with the First Assistant,” Bondi wrote on X after the decision.

“Accordingly, the First Assistant United States Attorney in New Jersey has just been removed,” she said. “This Department of Justice does not tolerate rogue judges — especially when they threaten the President’s core Article II powers.” A Justice Department official told The Epoch Times that Trump withdrew Habba’s nomination to be New Jersey’s U.S. attorney, and she was appointed first assistant U.S. attorney. This means Habba becomes the acting U.S. attorney, as the position is now vacant after Grace’s firing. “Donald J. Trump is the 47th President. Pam Bondi is the Attorney General. And I am now the Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey,” Habba wrote in a statement posted to X. “I don’t cower to pressure. I don’t answer to politics. This is a fight for justice. And I’m all in.”

Earlier on Thursday, Grace wrote on LinkedIn that she’s honored the judges selected her “on merit” and that she is prepared to follow that order and “begin to serve in accordance with the law.” “I’ve served under both Republican and Democratic administrations. I’ve been promoted four times in the last five years by both—including four months ago by this administration. Politics never impacted my work at the Department. Priorities change, of course, and resources are shifted, but the work and the mission were steady,” Grace said.

However, due to Habba now serving as acting U.S. attorney, Grace likely can no longer assume that office. Habba previously served as Trump’s defense attorney in multiple court cases. Last week, Trump’s pick for U.S. attorney of the Northern District of New York, John Sarcone III, was rejected by judges on that district court. Bondi then appointed Sarcone as a “special attorney” to her, granting him the powers of a U.S. attorney indefinitely.

Read more …

“By offering the far right a symbolic prize on annexation, Netanyahu appears to be stalling a government collapse..”

• Israel Just Drew A New Map – Without Saying It Out Loud (Blade)

In a significant yet non-binding move, the Israeli legislature has overwhelmingly approved a declaration urging the immediate extension of Israeli sovereignty over Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and the Jordan Valley. The motion, which passed by a vote of 71 to 13, was backed by right-wing and center-right factions including Likud, Shas, Religious Zionism, Otzma Yehudit, and Yisrael Beiteinu. The text declares that the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas — referred to in Israeli political discourse as the “Simchat Torah Massacre” — proves that the creation of a Palestinian state poses a mortal danger to Israel’s existence. “The Knesset declares that the State of Israel has the natural, historical, and legal right to all parts of the Land of Israel,” the resolution reads.

“The Knesset calls on the Government of Israel to act without delay to apply sovereignty… over all areas of Jewish settlement in Judea, Samaria, and the Jordan Valley.” Though labeled symbolic, Palestinian experts view the vote as laying the bureaucratic foundation for a permanent Israeli presence and governance in the West Bank, the heartland of a future Palestinian state as envisioned by international consensus. Saad Nimr, professor of political science at Birzeit University in the West Bank, told RT the implications of the Knesset’s move are far-reaching. “This is not symbolic at all,” Nimr said. “It means these settlements are now treated as Israeli cities. They’re no longer ‘occupied’ under military law. This is the legal and bureaucratic infrastructure of annexation.”

He continued: “The Israeli ministries — not the military — will now oversee health, welfare, planning, and infrastructure in these areas. It’s not about theory. It’s about bulldozers, budgets, and expansion.” Dimitri Diliani, a member of the Fatah Revolutionary Council, echoed that sentiment. “To describe the vote as symbolic is dangerously naive,” Diliani warned. “In Israeli politics, symbolism is often a precursor to de facto annexation. While the Knesset motion lacks binding legislative authority, it institutionalizes consensus in both government and opposition to expand the State of Israel’s settler-colonial project with new domestic political legitimacy.” Diliani added that members of the Knesset are already pushing legislation to replace the internationally recognized term “West Bank” with the biblical “Judea and Samaria” — further entrenching a nationalist narrative in Israeli law.

Many analysts see the vote not only as ideological, but also as a tactical political maneuver to preserve Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s fragile governing coalition. “It’s quite clear this was a political exchange,” said Nimr. “[The leader of the National Religious Party–Religious Zionism Bezalel] Smotrich and [the leader of the Otzma Yehudit (“Jewish Power”) party] Ben Gvir threatened to leave the government if negotiations in Doha led to a Gaza ceasefire. This vote is Netanyahu’s way of keeping them on board.” By offering the far right a symbolic prize on annexation, Netanyahu appears to be stalling a government collapse – even as truce talks with Hamas continue under Qatari mediation. Diliani described the move as “opportunistic,” adding: “It’s designed to pre-empt mounting international legal scrutiny, particularly after the International Court of Justice advisory opinion in July 2023, which declared Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory illegal.”

The reaction from the international community was swift but toothless. Jordan condemned the vote as “a blatant violation of international law.” The European Union and the Arab League issued similarly worded rebukes, reaffirming their commitment to a two-state solution. But both Palestinian analysts were unshaken by the lack of meaningful repercussions. “The historical record teaches us that international consensus does not always translate into action,” said Diliani. “Israel’s alignment with key Western powers, particularly the United States, has only grown stronger – even amid documented live-streamed Israeli genocide in Gaza and tremendous war crimes in Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank.” He cited continued US military support, which amounts to $3.8 billion annually in aid and has reached nearly $20 billion in additional military assistance since the war on Gaza began in October 2023.

“Israel continues to enjoy extensive trade privileges with the EU,” Diliani added. “Over three-quarters of a million illegal colonial Israeli settlers reside in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Yet the response from the international community remains negligible. Absent deterrent sanctions or accountability mechanisms, Israel interprets this as tacit permission to proceed.” Nimr was equally scathing. “Israel went into this decision with an overwhelming majority in the Knesset. That means they don’t care about the international community’s opinion. The EU witnessed with their own eyes the genocide in Gaza, the use of hunger as a weapon, and still didn’t take any real action.” “If there is no punishment,” Nimr said, “it’s interpreted as agreement. So now, they feel they have a green light.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Macron


play

hose

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 24 2025

Jul 242025
 
 July 24, 2025  Posted by at 9:25 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,  102 Responses »


Max Ernst Inspired hill 1950

 

• Gabbard Refers Obama for Criminal Investigation Over Russiagate (Margolis)
• Obama’s Role In ‘Russia Hoax Lies’ Exposed – Gabbard (RT)
• Tulsi Is About To Drop More Evidence Against Barack Obama (Margolis)
• Canada Accepts No Trade Deal Before 35% Tariffs Kick In (CTH)
• Trump Questions Kiev’s Use Of US Aid (RT)
• Western Media Reacts To Zelensky’s Crackdown On Anti-Corruption Bureau (RT)
• US Congresswoman Labels Zelensky ‘Dictator’ (RT)
• Zelensky’s End Goal Is In Sight, And So Is His End (Amar)
• Von der Leyen Warns Zelensky Over Risk To Ukraine’s EU Bid (RT)
• US State Dept Accuses EU of ‘Orwellian Censorship’ (RT)
• The Case For Media Transparency Within The EU Just Got Sexy (Jay)
• Biggest US Power Grid Sets Power Costs At Record High To Feed AI (ZH)
• Whose Politics Canceled Stephen Colbert? (Daniel McCarthy)
• Macron’s Popularity Hits Record Low (RT)
• Macron Sues Candace Owens For Defamation For Claiming His Wife Is A Man (ZH)

 

 

Treason
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1947688498330247277

tulsi


Bannon

2020

Fed

Mearsheimer
https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1947723599801925912

 

 

 

 

CNN does mention Obama and Tulsi now -in passing-, but only to assert that this story serves one purpose only: to divert attention away from the real and infinitely BIGGER story, which is that Trump is connected to the Epstein files. And then it has five different stories about that.

“The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment. There are multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence that confirm that fact.”

• Gabbard Refers Obama for Criminal Investigation Over Russiagate (Margolis)

Barack Obama has long pretended that he had no hand in the Russia collusion hoax, but that narrative is crumbling fast. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has just declassified a trove of explosive documents that reveal the Obama administration’s direct role in fabricating the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) — the cornerstone of the bogus claim that Donald Trump was a Russian asset.nOne key piece of evidence is a 2020 House Intelligence Committee report that flatly states that there was no Russian cyber interference connected to Trump’s win. Despite that, Obama demanded a rushed intelligence assessment in the final weeks of 2016, deliberately designed to push the false claim that Vladimir Putin helped install Trump. The goal? To sabotage the incoming president before he was even sworn in.

According to the documents, Obama and his top advisers — working hand in glove with Hillary Clinton’s campaign and their loyal media allies — staged a coordinated, calculated effort to weaponize U.S. intelligence for political warfare. What began as a smear campaign has now turned into something much bigger. On Wednesday, Gabbard confirmed during a White House press briefing that her office has officially referred Obama to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation over his leading role in the conspiracy. “Do you believe that any of this new information implicates former President Obama in criminal behavior?” a reporter asked. “We have referred and will continue to refer all of these documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate the criminal implications of this,” Gabbard replied.

When asked point blank if that includes the former president himself, Gabbard didn’t flinch. “Correct,” she replied. “The evidence that we have found and that we have released directly point to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment. There are multiple pieces of evidence and intelligence that confirm that fact.” A second reporter followed up, referencing Gabbard’s recent statement accusing Obama of helping to lead a coup against President Trump. “Do you believe President Obama is guilty of treason?” he asked. Gabbard stopped short of personally issuing a legal judgment but made it clear what she believes took place. “I’m leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice. I am not an attorney,” she said.

“But as I have said previously, when you look at the intent behind creating a fake manufactured intelligence document that directly contradicts multiple assessments that were created by the intelligence community, the expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic, and an attempt to undermine President Trump’s administration.” The implications are staggering. For years, the media and Democrats insisted that Russia installed Trump; now, under the Trump administration’s own intelligence leadership, it’s Obama who stands accused of orchestrating the deception that fueled the entire narrative. On Tuesday, Obama’s office released a rare statement essentially denying Obama’s role in the scandal.

“Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response. But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” the statement read. “Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes.” Obama can scoff all he wants and hide behind carefully worded denials, but the truth is catching up with him — and fast. The declassified evidence paints a damning picture: not only did Obama know about the Russia hoax, but he was also the one orchestrating it from the top.

This wasn’t some rogue effort by low-level staffers or overeager Clinton allies. This was a calculated, top-down operation to sabotage President Trump and deceive the American public using the full weight of the intelligence community. And now, for the first time, there are real consequences on the horizon.

Read more …

“..the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.”

• Obama’s Role In ‘Russia Hoax Lies’ Exposed – Gabbard (RT)

US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on Wednesday released a previously classified congressional report, which she claims debunks “Russia Hoax lies” – a coordinated effort by former President Barack Obama to distort intelligence regarding Moscow’s alleged role in the 2016 election. This marks Gabbard’s second major declassification move, following her earlier allegation of a “treasonous conspiracy” aimed at undermining Donald Trump’s presidency. The newly public document – produced by the House Intelligence Committee in 2020 under Republican leadership – challenges the analytical foundation for the conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to help then-candidate Trump win the election.

It criticizes the CIA for failing to adhere to its own standards, citing “one scant, unclear, and unverifiable fragment of a sentence from one of the substandard reports” as the basis for its assessment that Putin favored Trump. In a post on X on Wednesday, Gabbard called the report a “bombshell,” asserting it reveals “the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history.” She accused Obama and his senior officials of collaborating with media allies to delegitimize Trump through what she described as a deliberate disinformation campaign. “They conspired to subvert the will of the American people,” Gabbard wrote, claiming the effort amounted to a “years-long coup” against Trump.

https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/1948007534960198036?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1948007534960198036%7Ctwgr%5Eaebb331bf68ee0ee74f45252db892d1f0e19f30e%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F621884-obama-ordered-putin-trump-reports%2F

The report also claims Obama issued “unusual directives” to accelerate the release of the intelligence assessment before Trump’s inauguration, bypassing normal interagency coordination procedures within the intelligence community. Gabbard has argued that these actions warrant a criminal investigation and accused Obama-era officials of manufacturing a false narrative to discredit a sitting president. Trump has endorsed her findings, calling for prosecutions of Obama and top members of his administration. She also claimed that internal US intelligence assessments consistently concluded Russia lacked both the capability and intent to interfere in the 2016 election – but that these findings were deliberately suppressed. Russia has denied any involvement in US elections, and President Putin has repeatedly stated that Moscow does not favor any particular American political candidate.

Read more …

This is from before Tulsi dropped her second batch of files yesterday.

• Tulsi Is About To Drop More Evidence Against Barack Obama (Margolis)

Barack Obama’s team is in full damage control mode after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified and released evidence that Obama and his top officials in his administration knowingly fabricated intelligence to push the false narrative that Trump was compromised by Russia—an operation designed to delegitimize his election and kneecap his ability to govern. On Tuesday, Barack Obama released a statement through a spokesman in response to the recent release of Russiagate documents implicating the former president in the effort to delegitimize Trump’s presidency. “Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,” the statement read. “But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”

But, Gabbard isn’t backing down. In an appearance on “Rob Schmitt Tonight” on Newsmax Tuesday, she announced that her team will be releasing documents that directly contradict Barack Obama’s latest attempt to rewrite the history of the Russia collusion hoax. “We will be releasing further documents tomorrow that will refute that statement,” Gabbard said, dismissing the statement outright as part of pattern of misinformation pushed by top Democrats and their allies in the media ever since the release of what she called the “manufactured intelligence document” in January 2017. She didn’t stop there. “We will be pulling a whole host of statements that were made by the Obama administration, by Hillary Clinton, by senior Democrat officials, by their friends in the media,” she said. “They state over and over again after this January 2017 manufactured intelligence document was created that repeat the narrative.”

Gabbard laid out a damning list of examples. “The New York Times says, ‘Russian hackers acted to aid Trump in the election,’” she quoted. “Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan says, ‘There is strong consensus among us… to support the CIA claim Russian hackers aided Donald Trump’s election.’” And of course, Hillary Clinton’s infamous refrain: “I would be president if not for the Russian hackers supporting Donald Trump.” “There is a vast body of evidence and intelligence that debunks and refutes this statement you’ve just read and others coming from some of the Democrat leaders in Congress today,” Gabbard concluded. With more documents expected to drop soon, Gabbard is making it clear she intends to expose the Obama-era narrative for what it was—an orchestrated political operation designed to undercut the legitimacy of a duly elected president.

Now that the truth is starting to trickle out, the Obama crowd is sweating—and for good reason. Tulsi Gabbard’s document drops are pulling back the curtain on what looks like a coordinated effort by Obama and his top brass to sabotage a duly elected president using fake intelligence and a complicit media echo chamber. The phony Russia narrative was a deliberate attempt to delegitimize Trump before he even took the oath. And now, the evidence is catching up. No matter how hard Obama’s lackeys try to spin it, accountability is coming. And they know it.

Read more …

“..Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Mark Carney’s chief-of-staff, Marc-André Blanchard are once again coming to DC to ride their bicycles in slow circles at the bottom of the White House driveway while staring in the windows.”

• Canada Accepts No Trade Deal Before 35% Tariffs Kick In (CTH)

I’ll repeat it as much as needed, until it sinks in. The U.S-Canada trade deal status is simply a no-brainer. President Trump will answer questions about Canada and tariffs, he’ll put people into seats to discuss trade with the Canadian delegation, and he’ll give every outward appearance of being favorable to Prime Minister Mark Carney…. BUT… In the background, Trump is simply waiting for the USMCA timeline to trigger a renegotiation. President Donald Trump is ambivalent to the trade partnership with Canada. This moot-status reality is why there’s no substantive engagement. ‘No deal’ -until USMCA redo- is a win for President Trump. For some bizarre reason that I simply cannot fathom, almost every Canadian politician seems entirely oblivious to this reality. Instead, Canadian Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc and Mark Carney’s chief-of-staff, Marc-André Blanchard are once again coming to DC to ride their bicycles in slow circles at the bottom of the White House driveway while staring in the windows.

An article in Politico notes the Canadian premiers are now accepting the August 1st deadline will pass without any agreement, and the 35% reciprocal tariffs on non-USMCA products (meaning a lot of stuff) is going to trigger. Literally, everything from Canada that has a non-USMCA component is going to be tariffed. Think about all the stuff from China, Asia (writ large) and Europe that Canada assembles for finished goods. All of that stuff will be subject to the tariffs. That said, there’s good news coming from the recent meeting between Prime Minister Carney and the Premiers. Within their statement they use the term “developing large infrastructure projects.” That’s Canadian political codespeak for them realizing they are going to have to get back to regular energy development, raw material use/refinement and ACTUAL MANUFACTURING.

Canada is going to have to bring back their ‘dirty’ industrial jobs. For our Treehouse friends in Canada, this is very good news. The Canadian assembly economic model has to change in order to get compliant with U.S. trade rules. THAT’S TRUMP’S ENTIRE POINT! The environmentalists within Canada will not like this, but economically they will have no choice; it’s the only way to avoid a complete economic depression.

HUNTSVILLE, Ontario — “Prime Minister Mark Carney and Canada’s premiers are tempering expectations that they’ll strike a new economic and security deal with Donald Trump by the end of the month. “We would like to have the ideal deal, as fast as possible. But what can we get?” Quebec Premier François Legault said Tuesday. “You almost need to ask Donald Trump, and I’m not even sure he knows himself what he wants.” It’s a shift in tone from the premiers and Carney, who ran for election on his economic record, arguing he’d be the best person to negotiate with the president. But Canada is finding it harder than it looks. Carney met the premiers in Muskoka, cottage country north of Toronto, to update them on Canada-U.S. negotiations. As the leaders emerged from a three-hour meeting, they downplayed hopes of an Aug. 1 deal, arguing that achieving a “good deal” is more important than hitting a deadline.”

[…] As the negotiations continue, the premiers spent Tuesday carving out a strategy to offset the economic impact of Trump’s tariffs on the aluminum, steel, auto and lumber sector. They spoke about developing large infrastructure projects, breaking down trade barriers between provinces and encouraging a “buy Canadian” approach.”

Canada is going to go into a deep economic recession; there’s no way to avoid it. However, if they restart their industrial base, drop the ridiculous ‘green’ energy stuff, start exploiting their own natural resources and train an apprentice generation -just like we are trying to do- then Canada can bounce back stronger than ever. We know there are Canadian wolverines who understand this concept; we saw thousands of them in the Truckers’ vaccine strike. Make Canada Great Again, by Making Dirty Jobs Great Again, eh?

Read more …

“They were supposed to buy their own equipment. But I have a feeling they didn’t spend every dollar on the equipment..,”

• Trump Questions Kiev’s Use Of US Aid (RT)

US President Donald Trump has claimed that billions of dollars in American aid given to Ukraine under his predecessor Joe Biden may have been misused. The US became Kiev’s top foreign backer under the Biden administration, allocating over $170 billion in military and financial aid, according to official data. Trump, however, has long argued the total is far higher, estimating $350 billion in “equipment and cash” and criticizing Biden for “giving away” money without returns. He reiterated the point at a Republican meeting at the White House on Tuesday, questioning whether Kiev had actually used US aid for defense needs.

“Biden gave away $350 billion worth of equipment or cash. Worse than equipment – cash… They were supposed to buy their own equipment. But I have a feeling they didn’t spend every dollar on the equipment,” Trump said. “We want to find out about that [money], someday, I guess, right?” Trump’s comments echo growing concerns over corruption in Ukraine. The country has long struggled with graft, and its Defense Ministry has faced multiple scandals since the conflict with Russia escalated in 2022. Both the US and EU have pressed for audits and stronger anti-corruption measures. In April, US National Security Adviser Michael Waltz urged tighter oversight of aid, calling Ukraine “one of the most corrupt nations in the world.”

Despite calls for transparency, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky signed a law this week reducing the independence of Ukraine’s anti-corruption bodies, claiming it would streamline investigations. The legislation has triggered international scrutiny and protests across the country, with critics saying the move could be aimed at shielding Zelensky’s inner circle and concealing the embezzlement of military funds. Moscow has long argued that Western aid prolongs the fighting without changing the outcome of the conflict. Russian officials have also long accused Kiev of misusing foreign funds. UN envoy Vassily Nebenzia told RT last month that it’s “an open secret” Ukraine “stole billions of dollars out of the aid” and that Zelensky clings to power to avoid consequences.

Read more …

First, he effectively shut down the independent anti-corruption bureaus. That led to major protests in the streets, the first in years. So he (they) tweaked it all a bit and he claimed they’re independent again. These guys have embezzled billions and for some reason they’re now afraid of being found out.

• Western Media Reacts To Zelensky’s Crackdown On Anti-Corruption Bureau (RT)

Western news outlets have criticized Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky for stripping an independent anti-corruption bureau of its autonomy and placing it under the control of the prosecutor general. The move, carried out on Tuesday, drew widespread concern from journalists and observers. Zelensky signed legislative amendments on the subordination of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and the office of the special anti-corruption prosecutor hours after they were rushed through parliament. The changes were enacted despite vocal opposition from the agency. Established in 2015 following the 2014 armed coup in Kiev, the NABU was a cornerstone of judicial reform conditions imposed by Western governments and international financial institutions.

The agency was intended to serve as a key check on official misconduct, along with Western-funded NGOs and media outlets. The move to “neuter” the NABU, as Axios described it, comes amid escalating tensions between the bureau and the Zelensky administration. Earlier this week, Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU) executed search warrants against at least 15 NABU personnel and arrested a top investigator on suspicion of ties to Russia. Zelensky defended the measures, alleging that the NABU was ineffective and compromised by Russian influence, warranting what he called a necessary purge. The clampdown drew muted statements of concern from Western officials and warnings about its potential consequences from journalists.

”It is never a good sign when governments accused of corruption raid the agencies and activists trying to hold them to account,” wrote Bloomberg columnist Marc Champion. “It’s something the country cannot afford, just as it asks taxpayers across Europe to pump tens of billions of additional euros into its defense.” Champion also pointed to “an emerging pattern,” referencing the recent criminal charges filed against anti-corruption activist Vitaly Shabunin, who was accused of fraud and draft evasion. Axios noted that the assault on the NABU’s independence came after recent improvements in US-Ukraine relations. However, the outlet cautioned that Zelensky was “playing with fire,” recalling President Donald Trump’s characterization of him as a “dictator without elections” governing under martial law.

The Wall Street Journal accused Kiev of launching an “attack on anti-corruption institutions,” emphasizing the NABU’s role in assuring Western donors that financial support would be safeguarded from embezzlement. It also extensively cited criticisms by Ukrainian anti-corruption activists. Shabunin told the newspaper that the charges against him were meant to send a message: “Those who investigate corruption in Zelensky’s office will be punished.” Another person suggested Zelensky had grown emboldened by the West’s subdued response after Kiev rejected the independent selection of a NABU detective to lead another economic crimes agency. Foreign correspondents covering Ukraine expressed dismay at the developments on social media.

Oliver Carroll of The Economist called the legislation “shocking” and accused Zelensky of allowing “hubris” to jeopardize the goodwill of the foreign public. Yaroslav Trofimov of the Wall Street Journal claimed the crackdown represented “a gift of historic proportions to Russian propaganda” and to Western skeptics of further military aid for Ukraine. Financial Times correspondent Christopher Miller emphasized that the responsibility lay squarely with Zelensky and his chief of staff, Andrey Yermak. ”Orders came from the office of the president last night and the law enforcement committee passed it early morning in such great haste that members had to join over video,” Miller wrote. “This did not just happen overnight, even if it feels that way. This is a shift months in the making.”

Read more …

That Congresswoman can only be MTG.

• US Congresswoman Labels Zelensky ‘Dictator’ (RT)

US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene has labeled Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky “a dictator” and called for his removal, citing mass anti-corruption protests across Ukraine and accusing him of blocking peace efforts. Her comments came after Zelensky signed a controversial bill into law that places the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO) and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) under the authority of the prosecutor general. Critics argue that the legislation effectively strips the bodies of their independence. The law has sparked protests across Ukraine, with around 2,000 people rallying in Kiev and additional demonstrations reported in Lviv, Odessa, and Poltava. “Good for the Ukrainian people! Throw him out of office!” Greene wrote Wednesday on X, sharing footage from the protests. “And America must STOP funding and sending weapons!!!”

Greene, a longtime critic of US aid to Kiev, made similar comments last week while introducing an amendment to block further assistance. “Zelensky is a dictator, who, by the way, stopped elections in his country because of this war,” she told the House. “He’s jailed journalists, he’s canceled his election, controlled state media, and persecuted Christians. The American people should not be forced to continue to pay for another foreign war.”Her statements come amid mounting speculation over Zelensky’s political future. Journalist Seymour Hersh has reported that US officials are considering replacing him, possibly with former top general Valery Zaluzhny.

Senator Tommy Tuberville also called Zelensky a “dictator” last month, accusing him of trying to drag NATO into the conflict with Russia. Tuberville claimed that Zelensky refuses to hold elections because “he knew if he had an election, he’d get voted out.” Zelensky’s five-year presidential term expired in 2024, but he has refused to hold a new election, citing martial law, which has been extended every 90 days since 2022.US President Donald Trump has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, calling him “a dictator without elections” in February. Russian officials have repeatedly brought up the issue of Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any agreements signed by him or his administration could be legally challenged by future leaders of Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1947777633586159856

Read more …

“Western allies of Ukraine” still believe that Trump keeps seeing Russian President Vladimir Putin “as his main negotiating partner and Zelensky as the primary obstacle to a workable peace deal.”

• Zelensky’s End Goal Is In Sight, And So Is His End (Amar)

When the US picks clients, vassals, and proxies, it needs men or women ready to trade in the interests, even the welfare and lives of their compatriots. Vladimir Zelensky is such a man. A look at the elites of EU-NATO Europe shows he is not alone. But he is an especially extreme case. It is much less than a decade ago that the former media entrepreneur and comedian – often crude instead of witty – advanced from being a pet protégé of one of Ukraine’s most corrupt oligarchs to capturing the country’s presidency. As it turned out, never to let go of it: Zelensky has used the war, which was provoked by the West and escalated in February 2022, not only to make himself an indispensable if very expensive and often obstreperous American puppet but also as a pretext to evade elections.

And yet, now signs are multiplying that his days of being indispensable may be over. For one thing, Seymour Hersh, living legend of American investigative journalism, is reporting that Zelensky is very unpopular where it matters most, in US President Donald Trump’s White House. This is not surprising: Trump’s recent turn against Russia – whatever its real substance or marital reasons – does not mean a turn in favor of Ukraine and even less so in favor of Zelensky, as attentive observers have noted. According to the Financial Times, “Western allies of Ukraine” still believe that Trump keeps seeing Russian President Vladimir Putin “as his main negotiating partner and Zelensky as the primary obstacle to a workable peace deal.”

Time to go

And according to “knowledgeable officials in Washington” who have talked to Hersh, the US leadership is ready to act on that problem by getting rid of Zelensky. And urgently: Some American officials consider removing the Ukrainian president “feet first” in case he refuses to go. Their reason, according to Hersh’s confidants: to make room for a deal with Russia. Hersh has to make do with publishing anonymous sources. It is even conceivable that the Trump administration is leaking this threat against Zelensky to pressure him. Yet even if so, that doesn’t mean the threat is empty. Judging by past US behavior, using and then discarding other countries’ leaders is always an option.

Another, also plausible, possibility is that Zelensky will be discarded to facilitate not ending, but continuing the war, so as to keep draining Russian resources. In this scenario, the US would prolong the war by handing it over to its loyally self-harming European vassals. After, that is, seeing to the installation of a new leader in Kiev, one it has under even better control than Zelensky. Just to make sure the Europeans and the Ukrainians do not start understanding each other too well and end up slipping from US control. The Ukrainian replacement candidate everyone whispers about, old Zelensky nemesis General Valery Zaluzhny – currently in de facto exile as ambassador to the UK – might well be available for both options, depending on his marching orders from Washington.

Meanwhile, as if on cue, Western mainstream media have started to notice the obvious: The Financial Times has found out that critics accuse Zelensky of an “authoritarian slide,” which is still putting it very mildly but closer to the truth than past daft hero worship. The Spectator – in fairness, a magazine with a tradition of being somewhat more realistic about Ukraine – has fired a broadside under the title “Ukraine has lost faith in Zelensky.” The Economist has detected an “outrage” in Zelensky’s moves and, more tellingly, used a picture of him making him look like a cross between a Bond villain and Saddam Hussein. Even Deutsche Welle, a German state propaganda outlet, is now reporting on massive human rights infringements under Zelensky, with the impaired systematically targeted for forced mobilization.

Read more …

Don’t do it out in the open, you fool!

• Von der Leyen Warns Zelensky Over Risk To Ukraine’s EU Bid (RT)

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has requested explanations from Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky over the crackdown on the country’s anti-corruption agencies, which has sparked nationwide protests and international backlash. The agencies were seen as key conditions for Kiev’s EU membership bid and continued Western aid. Under the legislation, passed by the Ukrainian parliament on Tuesday and signed by Zelensky hours later, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAP) were placed under the direct control of the Prosecutor General, a political appointee. The controversial law followed security raids on NABU in light of claims by Zelensky that the agency was subject to Russian influence.

Von der Leyen was in contact with Zelensky, her spokesman Guillaume Mercier told reporters on Wednesday, saying she “conveyed her strong concerns about the consequences” of the new law and requested “explanations.” The legislation “risks weakening strongly the competences and powers of anti-corruption institutions of Ukraine,” Mercier said. The EC chief has urged “respect for the rule of law” and the “fight against corruption,” he stated, adding “There cannot be a compromise.” European Council President Antonio Costa reportedly also voiced concern to Zelensky and asked for explanations. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul wrote on X that the development “hampers Ukraine’s way towards the EU.”

The creation of NABU and SAP was one of the requirements set by the European Commission and International Monetary Fund more than a decade ago to fight high-level corruption in Ukraine. Since then, the two bodies have led far-reaching investigations, including into Zelensky’s circle. The organizations say they now have been stripped of the guarantees that allowed them to operate effectively. EU Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis told the Financial Times that financial aid to Kiev is “conditional on transparency, judicial reforms [and] democratic governments.” Ukraine was ranked 105th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index.

Read more …

“All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.”

• US State Dept Accuses EU of ‘Orwellian Censorship’ (RT)

The EU’s online content regulations are an affront to free speech, the US State Department has said in response to France’s praise for the Digital Services Act (DSA). The State Department echoed earlier criticism from US Vice President J.D. Vance, who accused EU member states of attempting to quash dissenting voices and stigmatize popular right-wing parties such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD). “In Europe, thousands are being convicted for the crime of criticizing their own governments. This Orwellian message won’t fool the United States. Censorship is not freedom,” the State Department wrote on X on Tuesday. “All the DSA protects is European leaders from their own people.”

Earlier this month, France’s mission to the UN promoted the DSA on X, stating, “In Europe, one is free to speak, not free to spread illegal content.” Passed in 2022, the DSA mandates that online platforms remove “illegal and harmful” content and combat “the spread of disinformation,” according to the European Commission. Critics in both the US and Europe have likened the regulations to the creation of a ‘ministry of truth’. Earlier this year, prosecutors in Paris launched an investigation into Elon Musk’s platform X, on suspicion that it was being used to meddle in French politics and spread hateful messages. The company dismissed the probe as “politically motivated.”

In 2024, the French authorities detained Russian-born tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov on charges that he had allowed his Telegram messaging app to be used for criminal activities. Durov, who was later released on bail, denied any wrongdoing and accused France of waging “a crusade” against free speech. He also claimed that French intelligence officials attempted to pressure him into censoring content during Romania’s 2024 presidential election. France’s foreign intelligence agency, the DGSE, confirmed that it had “reminded” Durov of his responsibility to police content, but denied allegations of election interference.

Read more …

“A recent report has exposed the European commission guilty of bribing journalist to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for favourable coverage..”

The EU taxpayer pays to be deceived…

• The Case For Media Transparency Within The EU Just Got Sexy (Jay)

A recent report has exposed the European commission guilty of bribing journalist to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for favourable coverage. How long can this go on? While we witness the continuation of the European Commission chief’s anti-democratic control over the project but also a host of values like freedom of speech, a Brussels Eurosceptic think tank has revealed that the project bribes journalists for favourable coverage. In a recent report, MCC claimed that the EU was secretly pumping at least 80m euros a year into both print and broadcast outlets often under the guise of fighting fake news. Yet the figure of 80m euros is wildly underestimated and in reality is likely to be three or four times this as the accountability and transparency of such payments are unsurprisingly buried in opaque accountancy practices with both the EU and media outlets themselves unwilling to be open to their readers/viewers.

Funding programmes are often presented using buzzwords like “fighting disinformation” or “promoting European integration” yet the reality is that it is a fund which is simply there to push propaganda for the project itself. The truth is that the European commission in particular is advancing with a strategy to bribe media giants more and more to promote the EU with its tainted narrative. Ironically, it is Ursula von der Leyen who often talks about “facts” being important. Her pretence that she believes in the truth and an independent press is in itself an illusion on a grand scale and perhaps the greatest example of what “fake news” itself is, on the EU circuit. Just recently, the irony of her being close to losing her job as commission president gave her the opportunity to give us all a good laugh.

“Facts matter, the truth matters”, she said recently in her speech to the EU Parliament, just before a vote of no confidence was held against her. She said – stop laughing – she was willing to engage in debate — provided it was based on “facts” and “arguments”. Yet there has never been an EU commission president who believes and benefits more in the dark art of bunging journalists and media more than Ursula. Indeed, the very media outlets who rushed to her defence when she was facing the jaws of defeat by a group of Eurosceptic MEPs recently are fake news outfits which have been receiving millions of euros of cash in brown envelopes for decades. “Von der Leyen successfully defends against no-confidence vote and attacks right-wing extremists”, thundered Der Spiegel, while Deutsche Welle (DW) reported a failure by the right: “Right-wing extremists fail with no-confidence motion against von der Leyen”.

“Right-wing extremists”? Really? Perhaps it’s worth noting that DW, to date, has received around 35m euros from the EU slush fund, according to the Hungarian think tank’s report which is compiled by Thomas Fazi, an Italian hack whose work is published on Unherd and who recently has published impressive investigations into the salami sliced power grab that the EU has been executing from member states. Ursula, of course, plays a pivotal role in that, as does corrupt media outlets like Deutsche Welle which is so spectacularly shite that its own German language service had to be shut down as no Germans would watch such gobbledygook garbage which champions the EU and Germany’s foreign policy ambitions.

This slush fund, aimed at boosting the EU’s status and relevance, has been around for quite a while but the report was revealing as it explains exactly how the European Commission goes about distributing the cash.mTraditionally, a big way the EU gets artificially positive coverage from Brussels events is via broadcasters. Outfits like DW, Euronews and most of the major state broadcasters across the EU benefit from a subsidy here, whereby the European Commission, European parliament and other institutions like the Council of Ministers provide filming, editing and studio facilities at their state of the art studios which, themselves, are a murky pit of corruption and embezzlement on a grand scale.

These “studios” provide everything for national broadcasters who have “correspondents” in Brussels. TV production, particularly on location is expensive. The EU pays for everything saving state broadcasters like DW millions in production costs which is of course paid back by coverage from the outlet not only with a positive EU spin but often simply replicating the EU narrative. It’s propaganda on a level which would make Goebbels proud as the genius of it is that the relationship which forms between the broadcasters and the EU grows each day until the point where both realise they need one another more than they have previously realised. The result is that so-called “news events” in Brussels which are so boring and would never normally see the light of day if the editors back in Berlin, Paris or Rome would have their say, get air time. And quite a bit of it.

What the report didn’t cover was the contracts themselves with the private companies which run the studios who employ scores of technical staff. Curiously perhaps, it is the same Belgian company which gets the contract every six years when the budget is completed despite EU rules making this impossible. All the Belgian firm does is simply change its name. Corruption of course has to be the heart of this. Someone in the EU commission is getting a huge commission for this of course.

Read more …

All AI data centers should generate their own electricity. But that will come only after a first batch of blackouts.

• Biggest US Power Grid Sets Power Costs At Record High To Feed AI (ZH)

Very soon if you want AI (and even if you don’t), you won’t be able to afford AC. Just this morning we warned readers that America’s largest power grid, PJM Interconnect, which serves 65 million people across 13 states and Washington, DC, and more importantly feeds Deep State Central’s Loudoun County, Virginia, also known as ‘Data Center Alley’ and which is recognized as one of the world’s largest hubs for data centers… had recently issued multiple ‘Maximum Generation’ and ‘Load Management’ alerts this summer, as the heat pushes power demand to the brink with air conditioners running at full blast across the eastern half of the U.S. But as anyone who has not lived under a rock knows, the deeper issue is that there’s simply not enough baseload juice to feed the relentless, ravenous growth of power-hungry AI server racks at new data centers.

“There is simply no new capacity to meet new loads,” said Joe Bowring to Bloomberg, president of Monitoring Analytics, which is the independent watchdog for PJM Interconnection. “The solution is to make sure that people who want to build data centers are serious enough about it to bring their own generation.” Well, there is another solution: crank up prices to the stratosphere. And that’s precisely what happened. As Bloomberg reports, business and households supplied by the largest US grid will pay $16.1 billion to ensure there is enough electricity supply to meet soaring power demand, especially that from a massive buildout in AI data centers. The payouts to generators for the year starting June 2026 topped last year’s record $14.7 billion, according to PJM Interconnection LLC, which operates the grid stretching from the Midwest to the mid-Atlantic.

That puts the capacity price per megawatt each day at a record $329.17 from $269.92. In response to the blowout payout, shares of Constellation Energy and Talen Energy surged in late trading in New York on Tuesday.As millions of Americans will very soon learn the hard way, AI data centers are driving the biggest surge in US electric demand in decades, leading to higher residential utility bills. That’s a key reason why PJM’s auction, once only tracked by power traders and plant owners but now increasingly a topic for general consumption as electricity bills are about to hit an all time high, has also become closely watched by politicians and consumer advocates.

As Bloomberg notes, this is the first auction that included both a price floor and cap, setting the range at $177.24 to $329.17, which of course was the clearing price level reached in this auction. Why even bother pretending there is an auction: just set the price at the max and be done with it. Last year’s 600% jump in capacity prices set off a political firestorm, resulting in PJM reaching a settlement with Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro to essentially cap gains for two years and make auction prices more predictable after wild swings in recent years. Despite the increase in costs across the grid, the price cap trimmed costs for consumers who saw the biggest hikes in the last auction. Exelon’s Baltimore area utility reached a $466 last time, while Dominion Energy’s Virginia territory came in at about $444.

Payouts to generators stayed at high levels due to surging demand from big data centers coming online swiftly, said Jon Gordon, policy director of non-profit clean energy advocacy Advanced Energy United. New facilities are consuming as much power as towns or small cities, coinciding with a wave of older power plants shutting down and lagging investment in new supplies and grid upgrades, he said.The per-megawatt price exceeding the 2024 auction, and well closing at an all time high, is bullish for independent power producers including NRG, Talen, Constellation and Vistra, Barclays analyst Nick Campenella had forecast. These generators have spent more than $34 billion so far this year on deals to mainly buy up power plants fueled by natural gas to feed the AI boom especially in PJM.

Read more …

“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” reportedly loses $40 million a year..”

“..the average age of Colbert’s viewers is 68..”

Jon Stewart revived late night comedy. He had no successors.

• Whose Politics Canceled Stephen Colbert? (Daniel McCarthy)

Stephen Colbert is at the center of a conspiracy theory. It was born last week, when news broke of CBS canceling Colbert’s late-night talk show. The network’s move wasn’t hard to understand: “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” reportedly loses $40 million a year, and Colbert is already in the final year of his contract. Viewership for all the late-night gabfests is evaporating; there’s no recovery in sight. Colbert is No. 1 in his time slot, but his show costs $100 million a year to produce and doesn’t bring in nearly enough eyeballs to attract the ad revenue to cover that. So in what universe does CBS renew Colbert and keep losing tens of millions of dollars? The conspiracy theory instantly popular among Democrats and many in the media who ought to know better, however, says Colbert is really being taken off air to please President Donald Trump.

If the Federal Communications Commission allows it, Paramount Global, owner of CBS, will soon merge with Skydance, a company owned by David Ellison, whose father is a major Trump supporter. The president doesn’t like being lampooned by Colbert; he’s happy to see his show end. Trump benefits, so Trump must be to blame—right? For those who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome, there are no coincidences. The truth is as clear as if Trump had been caught with his arms around the president of CBS Studios at a Coldplay concert. You see, if not for Trump’s FCC leverage over the network, CBS would have been content to keep losing millions on Colbert for years to come. That’s the crackpot view, and it’s politically convenient for Democrats, who’ve done their utmost to promote it.

Sen. Adam Schiff was a guest on the show the night Colbert announced its cancellation, and along with fellow Democrat Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, he took to X that evening to plant the seeds of conspiracy. “If Paramount and CBS ended the Late Show for political reasons, the public deserves to know. And deserves better,” Schiff wrote, feeling no need to offer evidence for the insinuation. “CBS canceled Colbert’s show just THREE DAYS after Colbert called out CBS parent company Paramount for its $16M settlement with Trump—a deal that looks like bribery,” Warren posted, referring to CBS’ settlement of a lawsuit over “60 Minutes.” “Do I think this is a coincidence? NO,” Sanders chimed in. The party instantly had its line, with shouty caps to drive it home.

It worked—Bluesky and Facebook lit up with liberals saying free speech was under attack by Trump, while CNN’s Brian Stelter, even as he reported the dismal financial reality of the “unfortunately unprofitable” show, packed his story with the conspiracy narrative. Stelter devoted more than a third of his report titled “Inside CBS’ ‘agonizing decision’ to cancel Colbert’s top-rated late-night show” to speculation about how the pending sale to Skydance might have influenced CBS, with heavy emphasis on the Trump angle, which he brought elsewhere in his story, too. Stelter even added his own spin, attempting to patch up one of the conspiracy tale’s obvious holes by suggesting CBS could have kept Colbert on air by cutting costs since Colbert had produced a much cheaper show, “After Midnight With Taylor Tomlinson,” that CBS was willing to renew.

But that’s absurd—“After Midnight” is already canceled; CBS canned it when Tomlinson announced her departure to return to stand-up comedy, and while she might well love the live stage, it’s obvious that running a late-night show on the cheap means paying hosts less: too little to keep Tomlinson. How little would Colbert, currently raking in a reported $15-$20 million a year, settle for? Colbert loses viewers and advertisers even with a $100 million budget—how poorly would a Colbert show more than 40% cheaper do? Hollywood Reporter notes the average age of Colbert’s viewers is 68. According to CNBC, the average age of David Letterman’s viewers when he handed his time slot to Colbert in 2015 was 60.

All the data points in the same direction:“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” was a long time dying. That’s true of late-night talk as a whole, too. “I hear Jimmy Kimmel is next,” Trump predicted on Truth Social. The president doesn’t have to pressure ABC to make that happen; the market will do that on its own, as it did with Colbert. Colbert had a hit when he played a parody conservative on Comedy Central. Once he stopped playing and presented his true face and politics to the country, he crashed. Donald Trump didn’t get Stephen Colbert canceled; everything Democrats like about him did. And the late-night host’s fate will also be theirs if they don’t heed this market lesson.

Read more …

The President sinks below 20%.

Odd math: “Macron’s approval rating has fallen to 19%, with Bayrou at just 18%, making a combined approval of 37% ..”

• Macron’s Popularity Hits Record Low (RT)

French President Emmanuel Macron’s approval rating has dropped below 20% for the first time since taking office, as criticism mounts over rising defense spending and cuts to social programs. Prime Minister Francois Bayrou also performed poorly in the same poll, with the two forming the most unpopular executive pair of the Fifth Republic. Macron’s approval rating has fallen to 19%, with Bayrou at just 18%, making a combined approval of 37% – the lowest in modern France, according to a new IFOP survey published on Monday. Even during the Yellow Vest protests – a major anti-government movement that began in 2018 over fuel taxes and economic inequality – the French leader’s lowest rating was 23%.

Macron’s support has dropped sharply among his 2022 voters, with only 49% still backing him – down 12 points. His approval has also declined among business leaders and executives, falling by 18 and 8 points, respectively. Bayrou, who was appointed after Michel Barnier’s government collapsed in late 2024 following months of coalition infighting and public backlash over mishandled pension reforms, is now advancing a controversial austerity plan. Last week, he introduced new tax measures on high-income earners to help close a €43.8 billion ($48 billion) budget gap. The austerity package includes a freeze on pensions and social benefits, healthcare spending caps, and the scrapping of two national holidays to increase productivity and reduce government spending.

Left-wing leader Jean-Luc Melenchon has called for Bayrou’s resignation, calling the measures “intolerable injustices.” Despite cuts in social services, defense spending continues to rise. Macron has pledged €6.5 billion more for the military over two years, citing heightened threats to European security. This comes as France’s public debt reaches €3.3 trillion – around 114% of GDP. A new French defense review has warned of a potential “major war” in Europe by 2030, identifying Russia as a leading threat. The Kremlin has denied having any intention to attack the West, and has accused NATO countries of exploiting perceptions of Russia to justify their military build-up.

Read more …

Candace has sunk her teeth in this for quite a while. She doesn’t fool around.

“[I]..stake my entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man.”

• Macron Sues Candace Owens For Defamation For Claiming His Wife Is A Man (ZH)

French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron launched legal proceedings against conservative podcaster Candace Owens in a Delaware court, seeking damages for what they characterize as a sustained defamation campaign targeting the French president’s wife. The 218-page complaint, filed Wednesday in Delaware’s Superior Court where Owens’ company is incorporated, encompasses 22 counts including defamation, false light invasion of privacy, and defamation by implication. The lawsuit centers on Owens’ repeated claims across multiple platforms that Brigitte Macron was born male, claims the Macrons’ legal team describes as “outlandish, defamatory, and far-fetched fictions.” The conservative commentator has disseminated these allegations through social media posts and an eight-part YouTube series titled “Becoming Brigitte,” which the plaintiffs allege has generated significant online harassment.

Tom Clare, the Macrons’ high-profile attorney, said the case is a straightforward defamation in a statement accompanying the filing. “Relying on discredited falsehoods originally presented by a self-proclaimed spiritual medium and so-called investigative journalist, Ms. Owens both promoted and expanded on those falsehoods and invented new ones,” Clare said. The legal filing indicates the Macrons’ representatives made multiple requests for retractions before pursuing litigation. In a joint statement, the presidential couple said they concluded that “referring the matter to a court of law was the only remaining avenue for remedy” after Owens allegedly “systematically reaffirmed these falsehoods.” Owens has maintained her position despite calls for retractions, declaring in a 2024 social media post that she would “stake my entire professional reputation on the fact that Brigitte Macron is in fact a man.”

The French first couple has consistently disputed these claims, citing official birth records. The lawsuit alleges the false statements have resulted in “relentless bullying on a worldwide scale” and caused “tremendous damage” to their reputations. BCC Communications, the public relations firm representing Owens, told Mediaite that the podcaster would address the lawsuit during her program Wednesday. The U.S. lawsuit follows mixed results for the Macrons in French courts addressing similar allegations. On July 11, a Paris appeals court overturned lower court convictions against two French women who had made comparable claims about the first lady’s gender identity.

The appellate ruling reversed a September 2023 decision that had ordered defendants Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, and Natacha Rey, a self-described independent journalist, to pay €8,000 in damages to Brigitte Macron and €5,000 to her brother. The women had produced a four-hour YouTube video in December 2021 promoting theories that Brigitte Macron was previously known as Jean-Michel Trogneux. The appeals court determined the defendants had acted in “good faith” despite making false claims, including allegations of “grooming a minor.” The decision eliminated their financial liability.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

elon 2024

Starship

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 22 2025

Jul 222025
 
 July 22, 2025  Posted by at 9:01 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , ,  60 Responses »


Saul Leiter Man in straw hat 1955

 

• Barack Obama Personally Planted the Seeds of the Russia Hoax (Margolis)
• New Intelligence Authorization Act Seeks to Curb Power of DNI (CTH)
• The Deep State Is in Real Trouble Now (Margolis)
• Merry Pranksters on Parade (James Howard Kunstler)
• 100% Chance of Nuclear War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
• UK Wants ‘50-Day Drive’ To Arm Ukraine (RT)
• Boris Johnson ‘Quite Sad’ Brits Losing Interest In Ukraine (RT)
• German Opposition Slams Ukraine Aid (RT)
• Russia Sanctions Have ‘Completely Backfired’ – German Ex-EU Commissioner (RT)
• Putin Speaks of Threat To Russian Sovereignty (RT)
• FDA Approved Moderna COVID Shot for Kids Behind Kennedy’s Back (Fleetwood)
• X Blasts French Criminal Probe As ‘Politically Motivated’ (RT)
• EU Prepared To ‘Stomach’ Uneven Deal With Trump – Bloomberg (RT)
• Trump Posts AI Video of Obama Being Arrested (RT)
• Trump Wants Washington Commanders To Change Name Back To Redskins (JTN)
• Five Israeli Soldiers Kill Themselves In Two Weeks (RT)

 

 

V
https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1947075656967176203

Tucker

Bessent

Fed

BTC
https://twitter.com/pete_rizzo_/status/1947102508721025229

Arno
https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1947239449068175660

 

 

 

 

Tulsi Gabbard has laid it all out, and promises more is on the way. But she can’t arrest or indict anyone. The DOJ and FBI will have to do that. Do Pam Bondi and Kash Patel/Dan Bongino have the same strength and conviction that Tulsi has, and can they defeat the resistance inside their agencies? Which are full of people who worked with the conspirators, and may also be indicted? It’s not so easy. At a minimum, they will need Trump’s full support going forward. It’s encouraging that Tulsi says people in the agencies are coming out of the woodwork.

• Barack Obama Personally Planted the Seeds of the Russia Hoax (Margolis)

When he spoke to the media on December 16, 2016, a week after receiving a classified intelligence assessment that Russian interference had no impact on the election outcome, Obama stepped before the press to quietly plant the seeds of what would become the Russia collusion hoax. With carefully chosen words and insinuations, he laid the groundwork for Democrats, the media, and the intelligence bureaucracy to spend the next four years undermining a duly elected president. Asked directly whether “Clinton lost because of the hacking,” Obama didn’t say “no”—he dodged. “I’m gonna let all the political pundits in this town, uh, have a long discussion about, uh, what happened in the election,” he said, feigning detachment. Then came the bait-and-switch: “We will provide evidence that we can safely provide, that does not compromise sources and methods.”

Translation? Trust us, but don’t expect proof. And that was the essence of the Obama playbook—demand trust in the narrative, even as no concrete evidence was made public. “If we’re gonna monitor this stuff effectively going forward,” Obama insisted, “we don’t want them to know that we know.” He offered a false binary: either trust the CIA and FBI “many of whom, by the way, served in previous administrations and who are Republicans,” or trust the Russians. “Unless the American people genuinely think that the professionals… are less trustworthy than the Russians, then, uh, people should pay attention to what our intelligence agencies say.”

However, based on prior reports, we know that multiple assessments delivered to the administration found no evidence of Russian manipulation of vote counts or election infrastructure, with a September intelligence report and a subsequent Presidential Daily Briefing on December 8 explicitly stating foreign adversaries could not covertly overturn the vote. According to multiple sources familiar with the December 8 briefing, the intelligence community found no evidence that Russia changed any votes or affected the outcome. Their interference amounted to some phishing emails and propaganda—nothing remotely close to altering the electoral result. Obama knew that, yet he pressed ahead with a narrative designed to delegitimize Trump.

Even more revealing was the moral preening that followed. Obama didn’t just imply that Trump had benefited from Russia; he accused Republicans of embracing foreign adversaries out of partisan spite. “You start to see certain folks in the Republican Party and Republican voters suddenly finding a government and individuals who stand contrary to everything that we stand for as being okay because that’s how much we dislike Democrats,” he said. It was a sly way of saying: Republicans who support Trump are betraying America. He drove the point home by alluding to Trump’s campaign rhetoric. “Some of the people who historically have been very critical of me for engaging with the Russians… also endorsed the president-elect, even as he was saying that we should stop sanctioning Russia… and was very complimentary of Mr. Putin personally.”

It was classic Obama—passive-aggressive, vague, with a twist of plausible deniability. There was no outright accusation, but rather a dark insinuation that Trump was too cozy with Putin and that Republicans were complicit. Political operatives, complicit media outlets, and Obama’s own intelligence holdovers would magnify any hint of treason in the coming months. And then came the dagger. Asked directly if Putin authorized the hack to help Trump, Obama chose not to confirm that there was no evidence that there even was a hack. “I think what I wanna make sure of is that, um, uh, I give the Intelligence Community the chance to gather all the information,” he said. But then he added, “Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin.” Again, no direct claim—just a loaded suggestion designed to hang over Trump like a cloud.

Obama framed the issue not as foreign interference but as a weakness in America’s political system: “Our vulnerability to Russia… is directly related to how divided, partisan, dysfunctional our political process is.” The implication? Trump and his voters, by being too partisan, were making America more vulnerable to attack. He even equated conservative media with Kremlin propaganda: “If fake news… is almost identical to reports… through partisan news venues… it’s not surprising that foreign propaganda will have a greater effect.” This wasn’t a press conference. It was the soft launch of a lie that would consume Washington, cripple a presidency, and erode public trust. Barack Obama didn’t just sit back and let the Russia collusion hoax unfold—he helped plant the seeds.

Even after receiving intelligence assessments that confirmed Russia had no impact on the 2016 election outcome, Obama chose to play politics. He stood before the cameras, dodging direct answers, carefully framing the narrative, and hinting just enough to give the media and the Democrats a green light to pursue this fake story. He knew the facts but encouraged the fiction, knowing full well it would cast a shadow over Trump’s presidency.

Read more …

On whose payroll is Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas?

• New Intelligence Authorization Act Seeks to Curb Power of DNI (CTH)

The response from Chairman Tom Cotton and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to the action of DNI Tulsi Gabbard was predictable. The SSCI has now framed the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 to modify the “responsibilities and authorities of the Director of National Intelligence.” [Section 402] We knew this was coming. The Intelligence Community does not like rogue actors amid their ranks, especially if those people have cross-silo access. The silo system is designed to protect the Deep State. Any entity who can cross reference the inserted information becomes a risk to the enterprise.Senator Cotton cannot directly oppose Tulsi Gabbard without exposing himself. Thus someone, not the SSCI, writes the legislative changes to the Intelligence Community rules and procedures and Tom Cotton simply advances them. That’s the way DC operates.

Additionally, Chairman Cotton does not want the DNI to investigate or generate its own intelligence. Cotton demands the ODNI just accept and regurgitate the intelligence Tulsi Gabbard would be given by the other agencies; no independent review of analysis permitted. All of these actions push the Intelligence Community power center back into the CIA and away from the prying eyes of the DNI. That’s the SSCI motive.

WASHINGTON DC – “A top Republican senator is proposing a sweeping overhaul of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, slashing the workforce of an organization that has expanded since it was created in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. Under a bill by Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, the chair of the Intelligence Committee, the ODNI’s staff of about 1,600 would be capped at 650, according to a senior Senate aide familiar with the proposed legislation. ODNI’s workforce was about 2,000 in January, but National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard has already overseen a reduction of about 20% as part of the Trump administration’s drive to shrink the federal workforce. The reduction in the staff Gabbard oversees could weaken her role in the intelligence bureaucracy.

[…] The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, exposed a failure to share information across spy agencies with catastrophic results. As a result, Congress established the ODNI to oversee all of the country’s 18 intelligence services, including the CIA, and manage bureaucratic turf wars from a complex outside Washington, D.C. What started as a relatively small office under the national intelligence director in 2005 has expanded over the last 20 years to include in-house analysis teams and centers focused on counterterrorism and counterintelligence. Cotton has described the ODNI as a bloated bureaucracy that should return to its original mission of coordinating the work of other spy agencies instead of producing its own reports and duplicating other agencies’ efforts.

“Congress in no way wanted yet another unruly bureaucracy layered on top of an already bureaucratic intelligence community,” Cotton said at Gabbard’s confirmation hearing in late January. “Unfortunately, 20 years later, that’s exactly what the ODNI has become.” Gabbard herself expressed support for downsizing the ODNI’s workforce at the hearing, saying she would work with Cotton and other lawmakers to eliminate “redundancies and bloating.” In the lead up to the election I outlined what the DNI could do with untapped power already given to the office. DNI Tulsi Gabbard has been following a path close to that outline. Now, we see Washington DC responding to that affirmed power structure and actively working to neuter the DNI. A very predictable outcome. The only intelligence silo more corrupt than the CIA is the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that oversees it.

Read more …

“For nearly a decade, the media, the Democrats, and yes—Barack Obama—have treated the Constitution like a speed bump..”

• The Deep State Is in Real Trouble Now (Margolis)

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just lit a fuse under the deep state—and it’s about time. Appearing Sunday on “Sunday Morning Futures” with Maria Bartiromo, Gabbard dropped a stunning accusation: that Barack Obama personally directed a “treasonous conspiracy” to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency before it even began. And now, according to Gabbard, the floodgates are opening—whistleblowers who were sickened by what they witnessed are starting to come forward.n“The implications of this are frankly nothing short of historic,” Gabbard said. She pointed to more than 100 newly released documents that she says show how Obama, just weeks before leaving office, greenlit a coordinated effort to sabotage Trump—after he was elected. “This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue that is so serious it should concern every single American.”

According to Gabbard, Obama and his inner circle simply refused to accept the outcome of the 2016 election. Instead of stepping aside and respecting the will of the people, they weaponized the intelligence community and pushed a phony Russia narrative to kneecap Trump before he even took office. “They decided that they would do everything possible to try to undermine his ability to do what voters tasked President Trump to do,” she said. “So, creating this piece of manufactured intelligence that claims Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected contradicted every other assessment… that said exactly the opposite—that Russia neither had the intent nor the capability to ‘hack’ the United States election.”

That “manufactured intelligence” became the foundation for the infamous Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that Obama ordered to be published in January 2017—a political hit job disguised as a national security report. Gabbard didn’t hold back in describing just how dangerous that deception really was. “There’s no question in my mind that this Intelligence Community Assessment… contained a manufactured intelligence document,” she said. “It’s worse than even politicization of intelligence—it was manufactured intelligence that sought to achieve President Obama’s and his team’s objective, which was undermining President Trump’s presidency and subverting the will of the American people.” This wasn’t politics—it was a coup. And Gabbard says more is coming.

“Next week we will be releasing more detailed information about how exactly this took place and the extent to which this information was sought to be hidden from the American people,” she said. But the most explosive revelation? The dam may be breaking inside the Intelligence Community. After years of silence, people who saw this treachery unfold are starting to step forward. “We have whistleblowers, actually, Maria, coming forward now, after we released these documents,” Gabbard said. “There are people who were around, who were working within the Intelligence Community at this time, who were so disgusted by what happened. We are starting to see some of them coming out of the woodwork.”

Gabbard says she’s committed to handing over all evidence to the DOJ. “There must be indictments. Those responsible, no matter how powerful they are and were at that time… they all must be held accountable.” She’s absolutely right. For nearly a decade, the media, the Democrats, and yes—Barack Obama—have treated the Constitution like a speed bump. They lied, they manipulated intelligence, and they tried to nullify a lawful election because they didn’t like the result. Now, the truth is starting to catch up with them. And if there’s any justice left in Washington, the days of these Deep-State plotters skating by unpunished may finally be numbered.

Read more …

“The forces behind this coup have done and will do anything to protect their grasp on illegal & illegitimate power.” — Stephen Miller

• Merry Pranksters on Parade (James Howard Kunstler)

Let’s not pretend that RussiaGate was ever anything but a “treasonous conspiracy” and a “years’ long coup” as bluntly labeled by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) on Friday. The election prank launched by Hillary Clinton’s campaign turned into an overt sedition op led by President Barack Obama to overthrow his elected successor, Donald Trump. DNI Tulsi Gabbard went even further and proffered criminal referrals on all this to the US Attorney General. If you think this is not extremely serious, you are not paying attention.

The New York Times was not paying attention in its Sunday edition. Not a word about this historic action on the paper’s website landing page. So now you know why the Harvard law professors, the Martha’s Vineyard chardonnay widows, and all the creative class hipsters of Brooklyn persist in their personal globes of political delusion. Instead, The Times dwelt on the Epstein business, still haplessly hoping to catch the Golden Golem in its golem trap. (Mr. Trump’s lawsuit against the Pulitzer Prize committee for rewarding the Time’s RussiaGate coverage is still pending, by the way.)

Meanwhile, DNI Gabbard went on Maria Bartiromo’s Sunday confab and warned of more info releases coming this week. Sooner or later AG Pam Bondi will have to announce that a case based on that referral is under construction. My guess is that this is exactly what Kash Patel’s FBI has been preoccupied with for months with no leaking — you can imagine severe penalties against that. You might also note that there are no higher crimes under our law than treason, as explicitly spelled out in the DNI report. The DNI also stated flatly on Sunday, “There must be indictments.” If you think DNI Gabbard went forward without consulting some crack constitutional lawyers, you’ll be disappointed.

And also meanwhile, Deputy AG Todd Blanche has applied for release of the sealed grand jury transcripts on the 2019 Epstein case from the DOJ’s Manhattan outpost (SDNY). And consider: all that info was completely segregated from the Epstein files that former FBI Director Christopher Wray controlled for years and years, meaning it was not subject to editing and manipulation. You may finally get to see the difference between the “hoax” elements of the story and the actual evidence.

The Russian meddling and collusion story might have seemed like “a thing” to many in the early January days of 2017 before Mr. Trump’s first inauguration. But when they went after the newly appointed National Security Advisor, General Mike Flynn, for having a conversation with the Russian ambassador, you had had to know that something sketchy was afoot. As this blog asked at the time: why are ambassadors from foreign lands here, if not to speak with our government officials? The story was preposterous but, of course, the news media helped run Gen. Flynn out of office and then led the cheering for the DOJ’s malicious prosecution of him afterward in Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s DC district court.

You also have to wonder if anyone in the news media might be subject to indictment above and beyond the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press. Is there a line between that and acting as an accessory to treason? What did New York Times editor (at the time) Dean Baquet think he was doing, publishing all that patent garbage? Or the producers of CNN and other network news?

The DNI called these activities a “treasonous conspiracy” for a reason. A conspiracy charge that encompasses a skein of persons in a continuous series of crimes extends the statute of limitations to the latest criminal act for all involved. You might also wonder how wide a net the DOJ could cast. Will it include such obvious players as Senator Mark Warner, who schemed to play along on RussiaGate as Vice-chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence? Or then-Congressman Adam Schiff on the House Intel Committee when, for years, he pretended to have “proof” of (i.e., lied about) Trump-Russia collusion? Or FBI Director Wray, who hid evidence, might have tampered with evidence, and apparently lied to Congress about many of these connected matters?

Or Andrew Weissmann, who virtually ran the phony Mueller Investigation as a RussiaGate cover-up op because Robert Mueller was mentally infirm? Or Lawfare Ninjas Marc Elias, Norm Eisen, and Mary McCord who appear liable for 2020 election hackery and the Jan 6 “insurrection” op (including the House J6 Committee fakery afterward) along with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi? Or former AG William Barr, who sat on the Hunter Biden laptop during Trump Impeachment No. 1, when the device was stuffed with exculpatory evidence withheld from Mr. Trump’s lawyers? Or CIA agent Eric Ciaramella, Lt. Col Alex Vindman, and Intel Inspector General Michael Atkinson, who conspired with Rep. Adam Schiff on the “Ukraine phone call” operation that was the basis of impeachment No. 1?

Or DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who botched his investigation (on purpose?) of FISA court criminal irregularities, or Judge James Boasberg who presided over those criminal irregularities and issued many of them? Or Special Counsel John Durham who took years to overlook the salient elements of the RussiaGate coup? Or many other figures involved one way or another. . . McCabe, Strzok, Page, Pientka, Thibault, Baker, Rice, Yates, Rummler, Halper, Pompeo, Haines, Bruce and Nellie Ohr. . . . Are they all rounded-up and sent to court together, like a Nuremberg proceeding? Or do they get their own separate cases? Or will the DOJ only go after the top dogs: Obama, Brennan, Clapper, and Comey?

Finally, consider this: demonizing Vladimir Putin set the stage for the Ukraine War — which was initially kicked off in 2014 under President Obama and his State Department / CIA group led by Victoria Nuland orchestrating the Maidan revolt. The official disclosures now by the DNI should make it clear that Mr. Putin did not deserve the treatment he got for years on end, and that the overall effect of it has been catastrophic for world peace. Half the people in the USA still believing all the manufactured bullshit about Mr. Putin has made it extremely difficult for President Trump to end the war in Ukraine that has killed millions.

RussiaGate had the gravest consequences, and now there can be consequences for the merry pranksters who started it and kept it going, one way or another, for a decade.

Read more …

“This is all about preparing for war. Everybody should start getting ready for drafts, to start going that way.’ They want war. They are not backing off.”

• 100% Chance of Nuclear War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

Six weeks ago, legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was signaling a big turn toward war. Now, Armstrong says, “The chances of war with a nuclear exchange is at 100%. . .. Plan on it, this is coming.” Can the world avoid nuclear war with President Trump’s 50-day deadline given to Russia to make peace in Ukraine? Armstrong says, “You do not threaten your adversary that is at your same level, publicly. If you want to say something like that, you do it privately in a phone call…” “Now, what will happen is Putin cannot possibly sign a peace deal. What, are you crazy . . . to do this in 50 days? We have staff in Germany, and I was told by my staff that a friend 60 years old was told to report to duty.

I had a friend who was at the Vienna Peace Conference, and he called me when it was over and said, ‘Holy crap, this has nothing to do with peace anymore. This is all about preparing for war. Everybody should start getting ready for drafts, to start going that way.’ They want war. They are not backing off.” Armstrong’s computer “Socrates” is signaling war as early as next month. Armstrong says, “Starting in August, this whole thing is going to be escalating up. Our computer has what we call a ‘Panic Cycle’ with our war cycles for 2026. That is not good. I don’t know what the hell Trump is smoking… My computer has been projecting war, and it is projecting war going into 2026. This is not looking good, and Europe will lose. It is as simple as that.”

The other big event that happened that will change the economic system forever is the House just passed the so-called GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins). The bill is now headed to President Trump to sign into law. Armstrong contends that US debt is being sold by big holders of Treasuries, and we have to find a new market for our huge Treasury debt or we default. Treasury bonds will supposedly backstop stablecoins that the banks will control. Armstrong says, “This is really a repeat of 1863. In the Civil War, they issued national bank notes. The banks were told to buy the bonds. They could buy bonds to fund the war, and they were allowed to issue currency backed by the bonds. This is the same exact thing. These stablecoins are the same thing as the 1863 National Bank Act.”

Stablecoins and the GENIUS Act are not good news for financial freedom or any other kind of civil liberty. Armstrong says, “The government will say we don’t like this guy, debank him. The government cannot do it directly. So, they indirectly do it the other way…””I know guys that are gun dealers and bullion dealers, and they have been debanked. This is the world we are going into. They know they are losing power. Europe is far worse. Spain now says you cannot take out $3,000 without government permission. They are trying to eliminate cash. . .. The forms of government we have today are going to collapse. Republics are the most corrupt form of government — period.”

Read more …

“..a ‘50-day drive’ to arm Ukraine on the battlefield and force Putin to the negotiating table..”

• UK Wants ‘50-Day Drive’ To Arm Ukraine (RT)

UK Defense Secretary John Healey is set to urge Ukraine’s backers to launch a “50-day drive” to arm Kiev, local media have reported. The plan follows US President Donald Trump’s threat to impose secondary sanctions on Russia’s trading partners within 50 days if no progress is made on resolving the conflict. Healey is expected to make the appeal when he leads a virtual session of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) on Monday. The minister is also poised to back Trump’s plan and pledge the UK’s support to “bolster Ukraine’s immediate fight.”

“The US has started the clock on a 50-day deadline for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to agree to peace or face crippling economic sanctions… We need to step up in turn with a ‘50-day drive’ to arm Ukraine on the battlefield and force Putin to the negotiating table,” he is expected to say. Earlier this month, Trump imposed a 50-day ceasefire deadline on Russia, warning of “very severe” new sanctions, including 100% “secondary tariffs” on countries buying Russian oil. He also announced new weapons deliveries to Ukraine, noting that the EU will foot the bill. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Trump’s remarks “will be perceived by the Ukrainian side not as a signal toward peace, but as a signal to continue the war.” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov stressed that Moscow will not cave in to any ultimatums but is still open to talks.

While the UK has been one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters, Luke Pollard, the country’s armed forces minister, warned last autumn of dwindling stockpiles due to years of military deliveries. Moscow has consistently denounced Western arms deliveries to Ukraine, warning they only prolong the conflict without changing its outcome. It has also accused the EU and UK of impeding ongoing peace efforts. Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Saturday voiced concern over what he described as declining interest among the British public in the Ukraine conflict. He added that the current government of Prime Minister Keir Starmer is “distracted” by “a lot of domestic issues.”

Read more …

“There are a lot of domestic issues that are very difficult right now, and you can see why they’re distracted.”

• Boris Johnson ‘Quite Sad’ Brits Losing Interest In Ukraine (RT)

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said he is “quite sad” about what he describes as waning interest in the UK in supporting Ukraine. Speaking to The Telegraph at the Ukrainian embassy in London on Saturday, he lamented that support for Ukraine in the UK is declining. “The interest in Ukraine and the appetite is so low nowadays. I find it quite sad,” Johnson said. When asked to evaluate how well current Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration has handled the Ukraine conflict, he responded: “There are a lot of domestic issues that are very difficult right now, and you can see why they’re distracted.” Support among the British public for aid to Ukraine has fallen in recent years, polls suggest.

A YouGov poll from February 2023 showed that nearly three-quarters of respondents believed the UK was not providing Kiev with enough aid, whereas only 3% thought it was giving too much. However, an Ipsos survey from this past February indicated that just over half of Britons supported the current level of aid, whereas nearly one in five said too much support was being provided. The UK has committed £18.3 billion ($24.5 billion) in total aid to Ukraine, including £13 billion ($17.4 billion) in military assistance. London has increasingly lobbied to deploy “peacekeeping” troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire as part of a so-called “coalition of the willing.”

Last week, Starmer’s government announced that the coalition would set up permanent headquarters in Paris to coordinate with Kiev to “regenerate land forces” for Ukraine and “secure” its skies with fighter jets if there is a cessation in the hostilities. Moscow has stressed that it views the initiative as preparation for a military intervention and warned that it views any NATO troops – under the guise of peacekeepers or not – in Ukraine as hostile. Johnson resigned as UK prime minister in 2022, a few months after the escalation of the conflict. He torpedoed the first peace talks between Moscow and Kiev in Istanbul that year by convincing the latter to withdraw from the negotiations, according to the Ukrainian head negotiator at the time, David Arakhamia.

Read more …

This is why they want to ban them: they have common sense.

• German Opposition Slams Ukraine Aid (RT)

Frustration is growing in Germany over increased aid to Ukraine while domestic spending lags, co-chair of opposition party Alternative for Germany (AfD) Alice Weidel has said. Berlin has been one of Kiev’s largest military backers since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Earlier this year, the German Defense Ministry announced that it would provide €5 billion ($5.6 billion) to finance long-range weapons production in Ukraine. In an interview with the broadcaster ARD on Sunday, Weidel criticized the allocation of funds to Kiev, citing unmet domestic needs. Asked about alternative uses for public funds, she pointed to a shelved proposal to abolish electricity taxes, which would have cost the state €5.4 billion – comparable to what Berlin is spending on weapons for Ukraine, she argued.

“And then our government, the Friedrich Merz government, gives Ukraine nine billion in German tax money and now wants to buy Patriot missiles for Ukraine for five billion. Nobody understands that anymore,” Weidel said. She was referencing a US-backed plan to funnel Patriot air defense systems to Kiev via NATO members, with Germany covering the costs. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said after meeting US counterpart Pete Hegseth in Washington last week that the terms of the arrangement could be finalized “within days or weeks,” though the actual transfer of the missile systems to Ukraine might take months. Berlin has indicated its readiness to cover the cost of at least two Patriot batteries to Ukraine – estimated at approximately $1 billion each.

Since taking office in May, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has pursued a hardline stance against Russia. Earlier this month, he declared that diplomatic options in the Ukraine conflict were “exhausted” and doubled down on his policy of providing weapons to Kiev. In response, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov accused Merz of choosing escalation by abandoning diplomacy. Last week, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova suggested that European nations are funding the “death” of Ukraine by paying for weapons sent to Kiev. Russia has consistently denounced Western weapons deliveries, saying they do not change the overall course of the conflict and merely serve to prolong the bloodshed and risk further escalation.

Read more …

“..the attempt to “ruin” Russia is a “life-threatening idea.”

• Russia Sanctions Have ‘Completely Backfired’ – German Ex-EU Commissioner (RT)

The EU’s sanctions aimed at crippling Russia’s economy and isolating it politically have backfired, instead harming their architects, former European Commission Vice President Gunter Verheugen has said. Western governments have imposed an unprecedented slew of sanctions on Moscow since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022. Last week, the EU imposed its 18th sanctions package, targeting the country’s energy and banking sectors. The restrictions include bans on transactions with 22 additional Russian banks and the Russian Direct Investment Fund, as well as prohibiting the use of the damaged Nord Stream pipelines.

Verheugen, who served as EU commissioner for enterprise and industry from 2004 to 2010, said the EU’s sanctions have rebounded on their creators, with the West bearing the heaviest costs. “There are few examples of a political goal – namely, bringing an adversary to its knees economically and wreaking havoc in a ‘warlike’ manner – backfiring so completely. The economic war against Russia is one such example,” Verheugen wrote in an op-ed for Switzerland’s Die Weltwoche journal, published on Friday.

“Objective data shows that the sanctions policy primarily harmed its originators, especially Germany,” he noted, warning that the attempt to “ruin” Russia is a “life-threatening idea.” The EU has not acknowledged this outcome, he added. Moscow has condemned the sanctions as illegal, arguing they have inflated EU energy prices and forced reliance on costlier imports, undermining the bloc’s competitiveness. Germany, which prior to the Ukraine conflict sourced 55% of its energy from Russia, remains mired in a two-year recession.

Some European officials have conceded that the EU’s sanctions on Russia have inflicted greater damage on European businesses than on their Russian counterparts, industry leaders say. Ferdinando Pellazzo, head of the Italian-Russian Chamber of Commerce, warned that the measures have severely impacted small and medium-sized enterprises. Siegfried Russwurm, president of Germany’s BDI industry association, cautioned that the country faces growing deindustrialization risks as high energy costs – driven by the cutoff of cheap Russian supplies – squeeze competitiveness.

Read more …

“..If we buy everything with the oil and gas [revenues] – and now they [the West] are trying to cut us off from oil and gas – then Russia will simply lose its competitiveness, and with it, its sovereignty..”

• Putin Speaks of Threat To Russian Sovereignty (RT)

Russia would inevitably lose its sovereignty if it relies solely on oil and gas revenues and abandons domestic production in favor of imports, President Vladimir Putin has said. In an interview with journalist Pavel Zarubin released on Sunday, Putin defended Russia’s decades-long effort to localize automobile manufacturing, saying it was essential for protecting the country’s economic and political autonomy. He recalled that in the 1990s many of his government colleagues wanted to abandon efforts to develop the car industry and instead rely on foreign-made vehicles, a view that he opposed. “We must talk about technological independence… If we buy everything with the oil and gas [revenues] – and now they [the West] are trying to cut us off from oil and gas – then Russia will simply lose its competitiveness, and with it, its sovereignty,” he said.

According to Putin, efforts to improve the domestic car industry began with cooperation with Western partners that were licensed to build assembly plants in Russia. Starting in the early 2010s, the authorities gradually tightened localization requirements, demanding that automakers produce more components domestically. “This was serious work. We were essentially creating our own cars,” Putin remarked, adding that the effort paid off after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, which saw an exodus of Western companies from Russia as Kiev’s backers introduced sanctions against Moscow.

Russia sold about 1.571 million new passenger cars in 2024 (up 48%), with Lada accounting for roughly 28% (436,155 units) and remaining the market leader, according to the analytical agency Autostat. However, all others spots in the top ten were occupied by Chinese brands. Russia’s Kamaz also distributed the most trucks in the country last year, despite an overall drop in sales, the agency said. Putin has personally promoted the domestic automobile industry and has often been seen driving Lada and Kamaz vehicles. He also uses a limousine from the Russian luxury brand Aurus as his presidential car. In 2024, he gifted Aurus limos to North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Bahrain’s King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa.

Read more …

“Anderson was “walked off the premises and was so upset that she crashed her car into the Secretary’s government-provided vehicle.”

NOTE: what is Marty Makary doing? He was brought in by RFK.

• FDA Approved Moderna COVID Shot for Kids Behind Kennedy’s Back (Fleetwood)

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly granted full approval to Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 injection for children while Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was on vacation—and without his knowledge or consent. As head of the department overseeing the FDA, Kennedy should have been directly informed of any decision involving pediatric mRNA shots—especially one as politically and medically sensitive as full approval for children as young as six months. On July 10, Moderna, Inc. announced the FDA approved the supplemental Biologics License Application (sBLA) for Spikevax®, the Company’s COVID shot, in “children 6 months through 11 years of age who are at increased risk for COVID-19 disease.”

The approval was made despite Moderna’s own scientists’ admission that there are “unacceptable toxicity” levels in mRNA vaccines, and that “lipid nanoparticle structural components, production methods, route of administration and proteins produced from complexed mRNAs all present toxicity concerns.” It was also made without Secretary Kennedy’s knowledge. According to multiple sources, neither Kennedy nor his Deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were briefed or consulted ahead of the decision, raising alarm over internal operations at one of the nation’s most powerful health agencies. Only July 16, White House correspondent and media host Emerald Robinson reported on Twitter/X that FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary “did not inform @RobertKennedyJr (who was on vacation) or his office that FDA was going to approve the mRNA shots for children,” citing sources familiar with the matter.

On July 17, CNN reported that Secretary Kennedy had fired two of his top aides “in an abrupt shakeup of the leadership at the nation’s sprawling health department,” also citing unnamed sources. “Kennedy’s chief of staff, Heather Flick Melanson, and deputy chief of staff for policy Hannah Anderson left HHS after only a handful of months on the job, following internal clashes that culminated in both of their removals this week,” the report explained. The CNN article didn’t connect the firings to the FDA’s decision to approve Moderna’s jab for kids. However, the MAHA PAC (Make America Healthy Again Political Action Committee)—a pro-Trump super PAC founded by RFK Jr.’s former staff to promote his health-focused agenda—corroborated Robinson’s account and connected the firings to the FDA’s Moderna decision.

On July 20, MAHA PAC cited Dr. Robert Malone—now serving on the newly restructured ACIP vaccine panel—as confirming that neither Kennedy nor Spears were informed of the FDA’s decision regarding Moderna and that a major HHS leadership purge unfolded upon their return. “The unfortunate facts are that this decision… was made public when both the Secretary of HHS and his trusted deputy Chief of Staff Stefanie Spears were on vacation,” said Dr. Malone, citing insider knowledge. “Neither Sec. HHS nor his deputy Chief of Staff (dCOS) were briefed or read in on this decision.” The move apparently set off a chain reaction. According to Malone, shortly after Kennedy and Spears returned, “a major reorganization of HHS leadership occurred.”

https://twitter.com/MAHA_PAC/status/1947026960804417642

Anderson was “walked off the premises and was so upset that she crashed her car into the Secretary’s government-provided vehicle.” Melanson, a veteran of the Trump-era HHS, claimed she resigned voluntarily. CNN sources say otherwise, alleging she was fired after Kennedy lost confidence in her leadership following the dismissal of Anderson. A spokesperson for HHS said that Matt Buckham, the department’s White House liaison, will serve as acting Chief of Staff. The FDA’s end-run around Kennedy not only signals potential deeper insubordination within HHS, but also highlights a promising shift under his leadership—one where incompetence, secrecy, and disloyalty are no longer tolerated, and where restoring integrity, transparency, and public trust could be the new standard.

Read more …

The little emperor strikes again.

• X Blasts French Criminal Probe As ‘Politically Motivated’ (RT)

Social media network X has accused the French authorities of a “politically motivated criminal investigation,” over a probe launched against the platform for alleged algorithm manipulation and “fraudulent data extraction.” X’s Global Government Affairs team said on Monday that the investigation was instigated by Eric Bothorel, a French MP and member of President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party. The probe itself kicked off in January after Bothorel and another senior French official alleged that the company’s algorithm was being used for the purposes of “foreign interference.” X has denied all of the accusations against it. Bothorel has previously been critical of X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, claiming that the network spreads “an enormous amount of hateful, racist, anti-LGBT+ and homophobic political content” which allegedly influences France’s political discourse.

According to the platform, French authorities had asked X to grant them a “recommendation algorithm and real-time data about all user posts” to be handed over to experts who were overtly hostile to the platform.X also protested being investigated as an “organized gang,” a classification that allows French police to use extensive powers, including wiretapping employees’ devices. The platform stressed it has refused the authorities’ demands. X remains in the dark as to the specific allegations made against the platform. However, based on what we know so far, X believes that this investigation is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech.

The probe echoes another high-profile case in France involving Telegram founder Pavel Durov. The Russian-born tech billionaire was arrested in the country last summer and charged with offenses linked to Telegram’s handling of illegal content, including child exploitation material and narcotics trafficking. Durov has dismissed the allegations as “baseless.” Commenting on the reports on X being in the crosshairs of the French authorities, Durov accused Paris of pursuing a “crusade” against free speech and progress itself while warning that the probe could end up damaging the French economy.

Read more …

When you’re losing, find a sympathetic victim role. BTW: who made the deal uneven?

• EU Prepared To ‘Stomach’ Uneven Deal With Trump – Bloomberg (RT)

EU officials are ready to “stomach” an unbalanced tariff agreement favoring the US in order to resolve the standoff between the two sides before a deadline set by President Donald Trump, Bloomberg reported on Monday, citing people familiar with the matter. Negotiations between Brussels and Washington have been ongoing since early April, when Trump announced a series of measures – dubbed “Liberation Day” policies – aimed at shielding American manufacturers. The plan included a sweeping 10% tariff on all imports from the EU and most other US trading partners. While the duties have been put on hold pending the talks, Trump warned they could escalate to 30% if no deal is reached by August 1.

]The new tariffs would be in addition to existing sector-specific levies, including 50% duties on steel and aluminum and 25% on auto imports, which the US imposed earlier this year. With the risk of a no-deal outcome rising, the EU is accelerating preparations for potential retaliatory measures, the outlet said. EU envoys could meet as early as this week to draft a response in case talks with the US collapse, the sources familiar with the discussions told the outlet. The move comes as Trump’s stance on tariffs appears to have hardened ahead of the August 1 deadline, leaving Brussels bracing for a potential trade confrontation.

“These negotiations are difficult,” French Finance Minister Eric Lombard said ahead of a meeting with business federations in Paris, as quoted by Bloomberg. “If we do not reach a balanced agreement with the United States of America, then we reserve the right to take countermeasures that are balanced, of course, but aimed at upholding the interests of the European Union.” Any significant countermeasures could escalate the transatlantic trade conflict, as Trump has warned that targeting US interests would prompt even stronger retaliation from his administration, the outlet noted.

The EU has already approved €21 billion ($24.5 billion) in retaliatory tariffs on US goods – including soybeans, poultry, and motorcycles – targeting politically sensitive states such as Louisiana, home to House Speaker Mike Johnson. It has also drafted €72 billion in additional tariffs on products such as Boeing aircraft, cars, and bourbon, should Trump impose reciprocal or auto levies. Beyond tariffs, the bloc is considering export controls and procurement restrictions. Washington has so far largely avoided retaliation for its tariffs, while collecting a record high of $64 billion in customs duties in the second quarter of 2025, according to the US Treasury.

Read more …

Not sure he should. Then again, they’ve haunted him for 10 years. Let him have his fun.

• Trump Posts AI Video of Obama Being Arrested (RT)

US President Donald Trump has posted an AI-generated video depicting former President Barack Obama being arrested and jailed. The post comes amid allegations that Obama and his senior officials had intentionally fabricated the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. Last week, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard declassified over 100 pages of documents, which are described as “overwhelming evidence” that officials in the Obama administration manipulated intelligence to initiate the Russiagate investigation. She alleged that the aim was to delegitimize Trump’s 2016 election win. According to Gabbard’s memo, the officials involved included former CIA Director John Brennan, former DNI James Clapper, and Obama himself.

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1947083821293482197

On Sunday, Trump shared a video on his Truth Social account featuring real footage of Obama and other Democratic leaders saying, “No one is above the law.” The scene then shifts to an AI-generated sequence showing FBI agents handcuffing Obama in the Oval Office while Trump watches and laughs. The video ends with an animated Obama pacing in a jail cell. Trump also posted fake mugshots of Obama and members of his former cabinet under the caption “The Shady Bunch.”

Trump endorsed the DNI’s calls to investigate the former president, praising Gabbard and her team as “fantastic on prosecuting Obama and the ‘thugs’ who have just been unequivocally exposed on highest level Election Fraud.” According to Gabbard, internal intelligence assessments in 2016 repeatedly found that Russia lacked both the capability and intent to influence the US election. These conclusions were later suppressed, she said, when Obama ordered a new intelligence assessment that blamed Russia for helping Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. This assessment was based on discredited sources such as the Steele Dossier, according to Gabbard.

“This was not intelligence gathering. It was narrative building,” the DNI said, asserting that Obama officials leaked false claims to the press and politicized classified information. “Every person involved in this conspiracy must be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” she stated. Russia has consistently denied allegations that it interfered in the 2016 US election. The Kremlin has described the Russiagate affair as a politically motivated smear campaign intended to justify sanctions and worsen relations with Moscow.

Read more …

“Trump signaled on Sunday that the stadium deal could be tied to the team name. “I may put a restriction on them that if they don’t change the name back to the original ‘Washington Redskins…'”

• Trump Wants Washington Commanders To Change Name Back To Redskins (JTN)

President Donald Trump on Sunday called on the Washington Commanders owners to return to their Redskins name and floated linking the change to the new stadium deal. The team recently announced a new stadium to be built on the shuttered RFK Stadium site. “The Washington ‘Whatever’s’ should IMMEDIATELY change their name back to the Washington Redskins Football Team. There is a big clamoring for this. Likewise, the Cleveland Indians, one of the six original baseball teams, with a storied past. Our great Indian people, in massive numbers, want this to happen,” Trump wrote on Sunday on Truth Social.

“Their heritage and prestige is systematically being taken away from them. Times are different now than they were three or four years ago. We are a Country of passion and common sense. OWNERS, GET IT DONE!!!” he added. In April, the owner of the team, Josh Harris, said the Redskins name would not come back with the new stadium. Trump signaled on Sunday that the stadium deal could be tied to the team name. “I may put a restriction on them that if they don’t change the name back to the original ‘Washington Redskins,’ and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, ‘Washington Commanders,’ I won’t make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington,” he wrote. “The Team would be much more valuable, and the Deal would be more exciting for everyone,” he added.

Trump called for the Cleveland Guardians to do the same. “The Owner of the Cleveland Baseball Team, Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change. What he doesn’t understand is that if he changed the name back to the Cleveland Indians, he might actually win an Election,” Trump wrote. “Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA).”

Read more …

Killing women and children on command is not for everyone.

• Five Israeli Soldiers Kill Themselves In Two Weeks (RT)

At least five Israeli soldiers have taken their own lives over the past two weeks, including conscripts and reservists recently discharged after extended combat deployments in Gaza and other active conflict zones. Suicides within the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) ranks have surged since the Jewish state deployed troops to Gaza following the deadly Hamas attack on October 7, 2023. Seven soldiers died by suicide by the end of 2023, followed by 21 cases confirmed in 2024, and at least 20 incidents since the start of this year. The most recent case, confirmed on Sunday, involved a 19-year-old Norwegian immigrant who immigrated to Israel to join the IDF less than a year ago and was still undergoing training.

Four others have ended their lives in the past two weeks, including a Golani Brigade serviceman who shot himself at the Sde Teiman base, and reservist Daniel Edri, who self-immolated after being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Most cases involve active-duty reservists, with military officials attributing the rise to combat-related trauma rather than personal or family circumstances. “One cannot breathe in the face of this statistic,” opposition leader Yair Lapid said. “This war also kills souls.” The IDF has confirmed that thousands of reservists have withdrawn from combat roles due to psychological stress. The true number of suicides due to service-related mental health issues may be higher, with Haaretz reporting at least 12 non-combat veterans whose deaths were not included in the army’s official statistics in recent years.

Now in its 21st month, the Gaza conflict has placed intense strain on Israeli forces, with prolonged deployments and mounting losses. Since the start of the operation, 893 Israeli soldiers have been killed, according to official data, in addition to nearly 1,200 Israeli civilians killed during the October 7 Hamas raid. The retaliatory offensive has resulted in nearly 59,000 Palestinian deaths, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Beyond Gaza, Israel has conducted airstrikes and limited ground operations in Lebanon, expanded its military presence in Syria, and bombed Iran. It has also escalated its activities in Iraq, Yemen, and the West Bank. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said Israel is fighting on seven fronts “to defend ourselves against… barbarism.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Shiong

Caretaker

Peyo

Great escape

Bench

https://twitter.com/gunsnrosesgirl3/status/1947177291697541242

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 21 2025

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


Saul Leiter Harlem 1960

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

Nunes

Flynn

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

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

Bibi


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

Sachs

 

 

 

 

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

• Tulsi Gabbard To Release More Obama Russiagate Files (ZH)

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

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

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

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

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

Jeffrey Who?

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

• Director Gabbard Explains Her Motive (CTH)

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

• Kremlin Rules Out Imminent Putin-Trump Meeting (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Brussels is no fan of Tulsi.

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Next 10 years.

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

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

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

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

Read more …

10 years too late.

• German General Urges Ukraine To Strike Russian Airfields (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

France is (going) bankrupt.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

This is where tariff threats may come in handy.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

WE will decide what you can drive..

• EU Hatching Secret Electric Car Plan – Bild (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

But also done in France, and almost the US.

• Banning Alternative für Deutschland: A Nightmare Scenario (Eugyppius)

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

60 minutes

US debt

gazelle

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

Desert

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 20 2025

Jul 202025
 
 July 20, 2025  Posted by at 9:43 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  52 Responses »


Saul Leiter Man with flowers, NY 1950s

 

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)
• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)
• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)
• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)
• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)
• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)
• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)
• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)
• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)
• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)
• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)
• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)
• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)
• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)
• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/BarronTNews_/status/1946621370105790687

https://twitter.com/PU28453638/status/1946338084833923411


Clint
https://twitter.com/ProudElephantUS/status/1946291703469466044

Comey

PDB

 

 

 

 

Tulsi Gabbard nuked the entire US political system with her report on Friday. It will take time for it to sink in. She doesn’t merely accuse Comey and Brennan, she says former president Obama is guilty of treason. An accusation lifted at Trump many times over the past 10 years of course, but the difference is Tulsi brings the receipts. Even then, it will be hard to get the MSM to report on all the court cases we will see, in anything like a neutral fashion. If only because the media, too, will be among the accused.

• Obama Admin Engineered The Russia Hoax To Undermine Trump (Margolis)

Fox News Digital has uncovered damning evidence that the Obama administration deliberately “manufactured and politicized intelligence” to push the now-debunked Russia election interference narrative, despite contradictory assessments from within the intelligence community itself. According to newly declassified documents that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released Friday, there’s “overwhelming evidence” that Barack Obama and his national security inner circle went to work immediately after Donald Trump’s stunning 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton. Their goal? Lay the foundation for the Trump-Russia hoax that would consume the nation for years. This wasn’t a matter of bad judgment; it was a calculated operation to delegitimize Trump’s presidency before it even began.

“Documents revealed that in the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the intelligence community consistently assessed that Russia was ‘probably not trying…to influence the election by using cyber means,’” the report reveals. “One instance was on Dec. 7, 2016, weeks after the election, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s talking points stated: ‘Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the U.S. presidential election outcome.’” Fox News Digital obtained a declassified copy of the Presidential Daily Brief, which was prepared by the Department of Homeland Security, with reporting from the CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency, FBI, National Security Agency, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and open sources, for Obama, dated Dec. 8, 2016.

“We assess that Russian and criminal actors did not impact recent US election results by conducting malicious cyber activities against election infrastructure,” the Presidential Daily Brief stated. “Russian Government-affiliated actors most likely compromised an Illinois voter registration database and unsuccessfully attempted the same in other states.” But the brief stated that it was “highly unlikely” the effort “would have resulted in altering any state’s official vote result.” “Criminal activity also failed to reach the scale and sophistication necessary to change election outcomes,” it stated. Declassified documents reveal that the FBI raised serious concerns about a 2016 Presidential Daily Brief (PDB), which claimed that Russia was trying to undermine the U.S. election.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence had assessed that Russia’s efforts were likely aimed at sowing doubt in the process — not disrupting it — and noted that cyberattacks on election infrastructure failed to cause any real impact. Internal FBI communications show agents pushed back, drafting a formal dissent and warning the brief shouldn’t move forward until their objections were heard. As a result, the brief’s release, originally slated for Dec. 9, 2016, was delayed following “new guidance” from ODNI. “It will not run tomorrow and is not likely to run until next week,” wrote the deputy director of the Presidential Daily Brief at Office of the Director of National Intelligence, whose name is redacted. The following day, Dec. 9, 2016, a meeting convened in the White House Situation Room, with the subject line starting: “Summary of Conclusions for PC Meeting on a Sensitive Topic (REDACTED.)”

The meeting included top officials in the National Security Council, Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others, to discuss Russia. The declassified meeting record shows that Obama administration officials agreed to recommend sanctions against members of Russia’s intelligence agencies — if their cyber activities met the legal threshold under an executive order targeting foreign cyber interference. But that wasn’t all. Following the meeting, then-DNI James Clapper’s executive assistant instructed intelligence agencies to produce a new assessment “per the president’s request,” specifically aimed at detailing how Moscow allegedly tried to influence the 2016 election. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence would lead the effort, with help from the CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS, effectively setting the wheels in motion for the Trump-Russia narrative.

The story confirms what many long suspected: Obama-era officials deliberately leaked false claims to the media about Russian interference in the 2016 election, pushing a narrative they knew wasn’t supported by actual intelligence. According to documents obtained by Fox News Digital, a Jan. 6, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) was politically weaponized, contradicting prior assessments and burying evidence that Russia lacked both the intent and ability to hack the election. Officials revealed that the ICA suppressed internal dissent — such as FBI and NSA skepticism about Russia’s role in the DNC leaks — and was based on debunked sources like the Steele Dossier. Despite this, the flawed report triggered a chain reaction: media smears, the Mueller investigation, two impeachments, and deep damage to U.S.-Russia relations. Intelligence officials now say this entire operation was designed to delegitimize President Trump and overturn the will of the voters.

DNI Tulsi Gabbard called the plot “a treasonous conspiracy” to subvert the Constitution and called for full accountability. She confirmed that all related documents have been handed over to the DOJ. Meanwhile, former CIA Director John Brennan and ex-FBI Director James Comey are under criminal investigation for their roles in pushing the phony narrative. As President Trump put it: “I think they’re crooked as hell… maybe they have to pay a price for that.” This wasn’t the work of a few rogue officials freelancing their partisan vendettas; it was a coordinated effort that implicates the highest levels of the Obama administration, including Barack Obama himself. The declassified documents lay out a damning paper trail: Obama was personally briefed on intelligence that debunked the Russia-collusion claims, yet his team deliberately buried those facts, rewrote assessments at his request, and fed a false narrative to the press that ultimately ignited a multi-year witch hunt against his successor.

This was no accident. It was a deliberate abuse of power, an attempt to sabotage the incoming president before he even took office, all under the guise of “protecting democracy.” From Obama to Brennan, Clapper, Comey, Rice, and Lynch, this wasn’t just dirty politics; it was a subversion of the peaceful transfer of power. And now, with criminal investigations underway and the full truth coming to light, we know that the real election interference operation wasn’t run from Moscow — it was orchestrated in Washington, D.C., at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Read more …

“This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.”

• China’s Economic Demise And Its Impact On The US (Lance Roberts)

Few are as candid and historically accurate as hedge fund manager Kyle Bass when identifying structural breaks in the global economy. In a recent interview, Bass painted a grim but telling picture of China’s economic condition, warning: “We are witnessing the largest macroeconomic imbalances the world has ever seen, and they are all coming to a head in China.” While China has long been touted as the next great economic superpower, its recent trajectory reveals a far different story, one marked by policy missteps, systemic financial rot, and a rapidly eroding growth engine. Bass didn’t mince words either: “China’s economy is spiraling with no end in sight.” China’s GDP deflator, the broadest measure of prices across goods and services, continues to decline as economic activity erodes.

For investors around the globe, this isn’t just a regional concern; it’s a seismic macroeconomic event that will ripple through capital markets. The implications are significant for U.S. investors because when global economies falter, especially one as large and interconnected as China’s, capital doesn’t just vanish. It moves. That movement will significantly impact U.S. assets as flows transfer back into U.S. dollars and Treasury bonds. This global repositioning of capital isn’t merely a symptom of market volatility; it reflects a profound reevaluation of risk in the face of deteriorating confidence in China’s financial system. We must examine what’s breaking in China to understand why this matters so profoundly. Bass emphasized that the issue’s core lies in the real estate sector, which accounts for roughly 30% of China’s GDP.

This massive share of economic activity is under severe strain, with property developers defaulting, sales volumes collapsing, and home prices declining across major cities. However, this should be unsurprising as, after the financial crisis, we wrote many times about the mass overbuilding of “ghost cities” that were responsible for China’s growth at the time. However, the “bullwhip” effect of that massive overbuilding was inevitable. “They’re sitting on 60 to 70 million vacant homes. It’s a Ponzi scheme that is finally collapsing.” – Kyle Bass. This particular real estate bubble, which is unprecedented in magnitude, is bursting. This creates deflationary pressures and undermines the value of collateral supporting large portions of China’s shadow banking system.

Adding to the concern is the Chinese Communist Party’s refusal to implement reforms that would bring greater transparency, capital discipline, and market-based corrections. Rather than allow markets to clear, Beijing is opting for control through capital restrictions, state intervention, and increased surveillance of financial activity. “China is experiencing a slow-motion banking crisis, and capital is doing everything it can to escape.” – Kyle Bass. That capital flight is inevitable and, as noted, will significantly impact the U.S. economy and financial markets. This exodus of domestic and foreign capital will reshape the global macro landscape. We recently discussed that the “Death of the Dollar” narrative was vastly exaggerated. While that post goes into more detail, there are five primary reasons why the dollar will remain the reserve currency of the world:

• Lack of a viable alternative currency
• Strength of the U.S. economy
• Network effects and global financial inertia
• Limited scope of de-dollarization efforts
• Resilience amid policy changes.
Most importantly, the dollar dominates the composition of global currency transactions.

China’s economic collapse only exacerbates the world’s dependence on the U.S. dollar for trade and storing reserve assets to support that trade. In times of crisis, investors don’t seek yield; they seek safety. Despite the U.S. running its fiscal imbalances and maintaining high levels of debt, the U.S. dollar and Treasury bonds remain the world’s premier safe havens. There is no alternative with the same depth, liquidity, and perceived security.

Read more …

From a Sputnik piece on the same topic: “..the delivery of F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine has been a “total bust,” as Ukrainian pilots have only managed to learn how to take off, not how to land.”

• Zelensky May Not Last Much Longer – Seymour Hersh (RT)

The political future of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky appears increasingly uncertain, according to officials in Washington cited by legendary journalist Seymour Hersh. The prospect of the politician being replaced by former armed forces commander Valery Zaluzhny is reportedly growing amid waning domestic support and mounting frustration in Washington. Zelensky suspended national elections under martial law and opted not to step down after his presidential term officially ended in 2024. His former top military commander, who was dismissed earlier this year and later appointed ambassador to the UK, has reportedly long been considered a potential successor. “Zelensky is on a short list for exile, if [US] President Donald Trump decides to make the call,” the veteran reporter wrote on Friday.

One US official familiar with internal discussions suggested that if Zelensky refuses to step down — which they believe is the most likely scenario — he may ultimately be removed by force. Zaluzhny is currently seen as the most credible successor to Ukraine’s leader, according to “knowledgeable” officials in Washington cited by Hersh, who added that the “job could be his within a few months.” Zelensky’s popularity, which soared to 90% in the early months after the Ukraine conflict escalated in February 2022, has steadily declined due to battlefield setbacks and ongoing economic difficulties. The latest polls suggest that only 52% of Ukrainians still trust him, while around 60% would prefer he not seek another term.

Western media outlets have recently shifted their tone, with some portraying Zelensky as increasingly authoritarian. Others have reported that officials in Washington believe “it’s time for an election and new leadership.” Russian officials have also raised concerns about Zelensky’s legitimacy, arguing that any international agreements signed under his leadership could be legally challenged. While Moscow has expressed a willingness to negotiate with Zelensky, it remains skeptical of his authority to finalize any lasting deal.


Read more …

Putin has zero reason to meet.

• Zelensky Wants Personal Meeting With Putin (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has once again called for a personal meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying this is the only way to secure a lasting peace. Moscow considers this pointless until the countries’ delegations find some common ground. Putin offered in May to resume direct negotiations – from the point at which Ukraine unilaterally abandoned talks in 2022. However, Zelensky challenged him to come and meet in Istanbul personally. Ukraine eventually agreed to send a delegation amid reported pressure from Washington, and since then the sides have held two rounds of talks, resulting in prisoner exchanges but no breakthrough toward ending the conflict.

The talks stalled in June after Kiev dismissed Moscow’s peace proposals. It later declared the process “exhausted” and indicated it had only taken part to avoid appearing dismissive of US President Donald Trump’s diplomatic initiative. On Saturday, Zelensky stated that the “pace of negotiations must be increased,” offering to hold a new round of talks next week – and once again demanded a personal meeting with Putin. “A meeting at the level of leaders is needed to truly ensure a lasting peace,” he said, adding: “Ukraine is ready.” Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, but he has cited martial law, which he imposed, as grounds for remaining in office. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova recently accused the Ukrainian actor-turned-politician of pushing for a personal meeting with Putin to reaffirm his political legitimacy, claiming he “is insanely afraid of being forgotten, of becoming unnecessary for the West.”

Despite Zelensky’s dubious legal status, Putin previously said he is open to a potential meeting – but questioned Zelensky’s authority to sign binding agreements. “I am ready to meet with anyone, including Zelensky. That’s not the issue,” the Russian president stated in June. “The question is different: Who will sign the documents?” According to Moscow, legal authority in Ukraine now resides with the parliament, not with Zelensky. On Tuesday, Ukrainian lawmakers once again extended martial law and general mobilization for another 90 days, with just a single dissenting vote.

Read more …

“Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lyin..,”

• Putin and Trump Need To Meet – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has called for an in-person meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump, describing it as the only realistic path to ending the Ukraine conflict. In an interview with the Ultrahang YouTube channel published on Thursday, Orban called Trump “the man of peace” but voiced skepticism about the sincerity of other Western governments and officials in Kiev. “Everyone says they want peace, but there’s still war. That means someone is lying,” he said, accusing some parties of having a vested interest in prolonging the bloodshed. “They want the war to continue, no matter what they say.” A deal won’t come from Kiev. It must come from Washington and Moscow. Until then, there will be no peace.

“The conflict will not stop until the Russian and American presidents sit down at the negotiating table,” Orban added. He expressed hope that such a meeting could lay the foundation for a broad agreement addressing not only Ukraine, but also global trade and arms control. Earlier this week, Trump said he was “very, very unhappy” with Putin and threatened Moscow’s trade partners with “severe” secondary tariffs if no diplomatic progress is made within 50 days. Budapest has consistently criticized efforts to arm Kiev and opposes its EU and NATO ambitions, warning that it prolongs the conflict at growing cost to European economies and taxpayers.

Trump has indicated that Washington will no longer fund Kiev’s war effort, but has allowed other NATO members to continue purchasing US-made weapons for Ukraine. Since returning to office in January, Trump has held several phone calls with Putin and has alternated between assigning blame to Moscow and Kiev for the lack of progress. In May, Ukraine agreed to resume direct negotiations with Russia under pressure from Washington. However, talks stalled after two rounds, with Kiev declaring the process “exhausted” and indicating it had only participated to avoid appearing dismissive of Trump’s diplomatic initiative. Moscow has said it remains committed to achieving its core objectives in Ukraine but prefers a diplomatic solution. The Kremlin has expressed hope that, despite his public statements, Trump is also applying private pressure on Kiev.

Read more …

That would be great. If Trump doesn’t get all braggadocious about his part.

• Putin, Trump and Xi Could Meet In September – The Times (RT)

US President Donald Trump could meet his Russian and Chinese counterparts, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, at an upcoming event marking the 80th anniversary of victory over imperial Japan in World War II, The Times has reported. China has announced plans to honor the date with a military parade in Beijing in September, and Moscow has confirmed that Putin will attend. The Soviet Union, China and the US cooperated in the fight against Japan during World War II. Both analysts and ordinary Chinese have called on Xi to “seize the opportunity,” invite Trump and host a three-way summit during the upcoming victory celebration, The Times wrote on Friday.

“Why not align Trump’s visit with the September 3 commemoration?” Renmin University of China Professor and popular Chinese opinion leader Jin Canrong told the Guancha news outlet last month. “If the leaders of China, the US, and Russia were to stand together during the military parade, it would be a great positive signal to the world,” he suggested. According to The Times, Beijing “tacitly encouraged speculation” on the subject by refusing to deny a report by Japan’s Kyodo News released last month, which claimed that the decision to invite Trump had already been made. Relations between Washington, Beijing, and Moscow have soured in recent years over the Ukraine conflict, accusations of Chinese cyber warfare, and what the US describes as “unfair” market practices.

Since the start of his second term in January, Trump has moved to thaw diplomatic ties with Russia and pushed for a settlement in the Ukraine conflict. However, on Monday, he expressed exasperation with the pace of the talks and threatened 100% secondary tariffs on Russian trading partners if the hostilities aren’t resolved within 50 days. Trump has also reignited a trade war with Beijing, which earlier this year rattled global financial markets. The tit-for-tat tariff standoff peaked with 145% US duties on Chinese imports and 125% retaliatory levies from Beijing. Tensions appear to have eased following a trade deal last month under which China relaxed restrictions on key rare earth mineral exports.

Read more …

Brussels has nothing.

• Trump Toughens Stance In EU Trade Talks – FT (RT)

US President Donald Trump has ramped up his demands in trade talk with the EU and is pushing for a minimum tariff of between 15% and 20% in any deal with Brussels, the Financial Times reports, citing informed sources. The negotiations between Brussels and Washington have been underway since early April, when Trump announced a set of measures aimed at protecting American manufacturers he called the ‘Liberation Day.’ They included a blanket 10% tariff on all imports from the EU and most other US trading partners. The duties have been put on hold pending the talks, but the US president warned that they would grow to 30% if no deal is reached between Washington and Brussels by August 1. The tariffs would be applied on top of the existing sector-specific duties, such as 50% on steel, aluminum duties and 25% car imports levies introduced by the US earlier this year.

The Trump administration is hardening its stance in talks with the EU in order to test the bloc’s “pain threshold,” the FT said in an article on Friday. According to the paper’s sources, the president was also “unmoved” by an offer from Brussels to reduce the 25% car tariffs and wants them to stay as they are. EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic provided a “downbeat” assessment of his recent discussions with the Americans during the meeting of the bloc’s ambassadors on Friday, two people briefed on the matter said. An EU diplomat has told the paper that if Trump insists on 15% to 20% duties, the EU would be forced to retaliate. Brussels has prepared several packages of counter-tariffs against Washington, but delayed their implementation until August 1.

“We do not want a trade war, but we do not know if the US will leave us a choice,” the source said. A second EU diplomat stressed that “the mood has clearly changed” in Brussels in favor of retaliation, adding that “we are not going to settle at 15% percent.” Washington has so far largely avoided retaliation for its tariffs, while collecting a record high of $64 billion in customs duties in the second quarter of 2025, according to the US Treasury.

Read more …

For now, this is simply about the reserve currency. Stop the threats and they will let you keep it.

• Trump Issues New Threat To BRICS (RT)

President Donald Trump has claimed that BRICS is “fading out fast,” while warning that any attempts by the group to challenge the US dollar will be met with a harsh economic backlash. Speaking at the White House on Friday, Trump denounced what he called BRICS’ attempts to weaken the dollar. “They wanted to try and take over the dollar, the dominance of the dollar… And I said, anybody that’s in the BRICS consortium of nations, we’re going to tariff you 10%.” Trump stressed that Washington will spare no effort to preserve the dollar’s hegemony. “The reserve currency is so important. You know, if we lost that, that would be like losing a World War.” Washington “can never let anyone play games,” Trump said, adding that he has decided to “hit them [BRICS] very, very hard.” “If they ever really form in a meaningful way, it will end very quickly,” he said.

Trump also claimed his threat to impose 10% tariffs on imports from the BRICS had completely derailed the group’s summit in Rio de Janeiro earlier this month. “They had a meeting the following day and almost nobody showed up,” he said. However, the BRICS summit featured broad participation at the highest level. While China’s President Xi Jinping was absent from the meeting, his country was represented by Chinese Premier Li Qiang. Russian President Vladimir Putin was also absent, but addressed the summit remotely. Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa and Indonesia’s President Prabowo Subianto, as well as leaders from Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the UAE attended in person.

In October, Russia’s Finance Minister Anton Siluanov stated that the share of national currencies in trade among BRICS countries has reached 65%, with the share of the dollar and euro plunging below 30%. Earlier this week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explained that BRICS countries are exploring dollar alternatives “to shield themselves from US arbitrariness.” However, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov has said that BRICS has never been meant as a rival to the US, although warning that “the language of threats and manipulation… is not the way to speak to members of this group.”

Read more …

“Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence.”

• Trump’s Ultimatum To Russia Is Bluster and Bluff (SCF)

What’s behind Trump’s angry ultimatum to Russia this week? The short answer: failure and frustration. Donald Trump promised American voters that he would end the Ukraine war in 24 hours upon his election in November 2024. Six months into his presidency, Trump has failed to deliver on his boastful promises. This week, Trump flipped his pacemaker image by pledging billions of dollars worth of new American weaponry to Ukraine. He also issued a warning to Russia to call a ceasefire within 50 days or else face severe secondary tariffs on its oil and gas exports. The tariffs, quoted at 100 percent, will be applied to nations purchasing Russian exports, primarily Brazil, China, and India. The latter move indicates that the U.S.-led proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is really part of a bigger geopolitical confrontation to maintain American global hegemony.

In any case, Moscow dismissed Trump’s ultimatum. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said that Moscow would not comply with pressure and that Russia would not back down from its strategic goals in Ukraine to counter NATO’s historic aggression. It is clear that Trump and his administration have failed to understand Russia’s strategic position and the root causes of the conflict. Trump’s supposed diplomacy is seen to operate on a superficial basis more akin to showbiz, with no substance. He wants a peace deal with Russia to show off his vaunted skills as a business negotiator and to grab the limelight, headlines, and adulation.

Resolving a conflict like Ukraine requires deep historical understanding and genuine commitment to due diligence. Moscow has repeatedly stated the need to address the root causes of the conflict: the expansion of NATO on its borders, the CIA-sponsored coup in Kiev in 2014, and the nature of the NATO-weaponized Neo-Nazi regime over the past decade. Trump and his administration have failed to appreciate Russia’s viewpoint. Thus, expecting a peace deal based on nothing but rhetoric and vacuous claims about “ending the killing” is futile. It won’t happen.

This failure, based on unrealistic expectations, has led Trump to adopt an increasingly bitter attitude towards Russian President Vladimir Putin in recent weeks. Ironically, Trump has accused Putin of duplicity and procrastination when, in reality, it is Trump who has shown no serious commitment to resolving the conflict. Now, with chagrin and bruised ego, Trump has reacted with frustration over what are his own failings by issuing ultimatums to Russia. Trump’s 50-day deadline for a Russian response to his demands has a similarity to the 60-day deadline he threatened Iran with, after which he carried out a massive bombing attack on that country. Trump’s aggression towards Iran has turned out to be a fiasco and failure. Threatening Russia is even more useless.

This proclivity for threatening other nations has the hallmark of a Mafiosa megalomaniac. It is also causing Trump to lose support among his voter base, who believed he was going to end “endless wars.” It’s shambolic. Biden’s war is becoming Trump’s war because, at the end of the day, it is the U.S. imperial deep state that rules. Trump’s mercurial switch from professing peace in Ukraine to ramping up the promise of weapons shows that his previous aspirations were always hollow and contingent on other interests. It seems that the 47th American president did not want peace after all. What was driving his apparent desire to end the conflict in Ukraine – what he deprecated as “Biden’s war” – was simply to cut American financial costs.

2016

Read more …

“..related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist…”

• DOJ Asks Court To Unseal Jeffrey Epstein Grand Jury Testimony (JTN)

The Justice Department on Friday afternoon formally asked a federal judge to unseal grand jury testimony related to the prosecution of the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, fulfilling President Donald Trump’s directive on Thursday. Trump directed Attorney General Pam Bondi to file the request in a Truth Social post, where he criticized the news media for its focus on the administration’s handling of the Epstein case. Bondi vowed to do so. The Justice Department claimed in its filing that the release of the additional information in the case was “a matter of public interest.”

“The public’s interest in the Epstein matter has remained,” the filing reads. “Given this longstanding and legitimate interest, the government now moves to unseal grand jury transcripts associated with Epstein.” The department said it will file a similar motion in the case against former Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, CNN reported, though Trump did not direct the publication of testimony in her case. The Trump administration has faced heavy backlash for its handling of the case, particularly related to the late financier’s alleged “client list,” which the administration says does not exist.

Read more …

Epstein is so last week…

• The Epstein Enigma (James Howard Kunstler)

Do you detect the signs of Rope-a-Dope in Mr. Trump’s recent blasts against the Epstein mess? It must be obvious that anything he says will be violently opposed by his Democratic Party enemies. So, now he’s got them slavering for release of the Epstein files, whatever they are, or rather, whatever’s left after former FBI Director Christopher Wray & Co. curated them, shall we say. (They had many years to get it done.)

I’m not the first to point out that the president’s most rabid enemies ignored the Epstein case during the entirety of “Joe Biden’s” four-year ectoplasmic visitation in the White House. (They were up to their eyeballs siccing Fani Willis, Letitia James, and Alvin Bragg on Trump.) “Squad” stalwart Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) said the other day that she was “too busy” to delve into Epstein. Everybody else from Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) to Jamie Raskin (D-MD) just barfed up word salad on MSNBC to excuse themselves for overlooking the matter. But since Mr. Trump affected to quash the whole psychodrama in the harshest tones, they’ve got all the time in the world to pore over Epstein docs. Well, maybe they’ll get what they asked for.

So, yesterday, the president ordered AG Bondi to release the grand jury testimony that has been under seal for years and years, and she has promised to do that today, Friday, July 18, subject to the court approval, meaning it could invite a months-long legal battle. Gawd knows what’s in there, but at least it was kept out of Christopher Wray’s clutches. So, it’s separate from the videos and other stuff alleged to be in the FBI possession. Many say, not altogether convincingly, that the names of “victims” and witnesses must be protected. There’s much confused public controversy as to whether girls allegedly trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were children or young adults (who would be middle-aged now), and that issue is apparently separate from whatever commercial “child porn” was in the FBI’s Epstein file cabinet that AG Bondi has referred to.

Anyway, Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure says: “Disclosure is permitted to government attorneys or personnel (including state or tribal officials) deemed necessary to assist in enforcing federal criminal law, such as in complex investigations involving organized crime or public corruption.” The current state of the Epstein scandal looks a little like a ruse by Mr. Trump to hang his enemies out to dry and sell them the clothes-line to do it with. In all their garish attempts to get Trump, the Democrats have only ended up Wile E. Coyote’d every single time. Why would this round be any different?

Meanwhile, Naomi Wolf by way of Eric Weinstein has come up with quite an original view of what Jeffrey Epstein was about in the strange role he played among the so-called elite. I will link to her recent substack entry below this blog so you can see for yourself. For Ms. Wolf, it was all about the Silicon Valley “network” of tech moguls, their vast power and influence, and an effort by this group, using Epstein as a broker, to steer science generally in the direction that benefited them and their companies. Epstein served as a middleman between politicians, the weapons industry, the big research universities (all those grants!), and linked intel services such as CIA, Mossad, and MI6.

This is what Eric Weinstein means when he describes Epstein as “a construct.” He was less a person than a function. Epstein cultivated the “list” of elite scientists, tech entrepreneurs, academics, and movie stars with lavish parties and trips to his various compounds in Manhattan, Florida, the US Virgin Islands, and his New Mexico ranch — all in the service of building this tech-and-science network that would become a gigantic mutual aid-and-allegiance society advancing the interests of themselves and their institutions. In the process, certain goodies in the form of young ladies groomed in the sexual arts were made available. Some members of this elite network indulged and some did not, the theory goes.

Read more …

Pepe travels a lot, but his mind is stuck in place.

• And It’s One, Two, Three, What Are We Fighting For? (Pepe Escobar)

All of you Vietnam vets and draft resisters will recognize where this column’s headline is coming from. Oh yes, this ain’t the late 1960s anymore, so it’s time to revamp it – no AI needed – and expand it: from now on, be assured everyone in the wild, wild West will be forced to fight and/or endure three overlapping NATO wars.

War number 1
It’s Europe v. Russia, of course. Not proxy anymore: hot ‘n nasty, direct. Considering the advanced rottenness of the whole Ukrainian front, new fronts are already proliferating: the South Caucasus; clandestine ops in the Baltic Sea; MI6 recruiting frenzy across Central Asia; fresh terrorism ahead in the Black Sea, especially Crimea. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson succinctly nailed it: we are already on WWIII. Actually we are already deep in the extended preamble to WWIII. Circus Ringmaster in D.C. and the billionaires/donor class behind him are of course clueless. Re-reading Keynes – The Economic Consequences of the Peace – is an absolute must like never before. History does repeat itself. Yet this ain’t 1914 or 1935; now nuclear weapons may come into play.

The Kremlin and Russia’s Security Council are very much aware of the high stakes. In his recent interview to Kommersant, Sergei Shoigu even rolled out some key NATO numbers to stress the threat Russia faces: over 50,000 tanks and armored vehicles; over 7,000 combat aircraft; over 750 warships; 350 military and civilian satellites; an immense offense (italics mine) budget. Well, what sly Shoigu did not say is that when push comes to shove, it only takes Mr. Khinzal, Mr. Sarmat, Mr. Zircon and Mr. Oreshnik to deliver a few strategic business cards to paralyze the whole NATO machinery in a matter of minutes.

War number 2
It’s the Empire of Chaos v. Iran in West Asia, with Eretz Israel as much as proxy as a lead actor. The Circus Ringmaster – whose only “strategy” is to concoct shady deals to enrich himself and shysters in his close circle – dreams of an Israeli-centric West Asia, a toxic crossover of the Abraham Accords 2.0 with the IMEC corridor, creating, as Alastair Crooke defined it, “a business-led West Asia, centered on Tel Aviv (with Trump as its de facto ‘President’), and via this business connectivity corridor, be able “to strike further beyond – with the Gulf States penetrating into BRICS’ south Asian heartland to disrupt BRICS connectivity and corridors.”

Using the Arabs against BRICS won’t cut it even with MbZ in the UAE and MbS in Saudi Arabia, who have both realized the business scam will only work if there is real peace in Gaza; some sort of humanitarian solution for the Palestinians; and rebuilding the Gaza strip. The death cult in Tel Aviv will never allow any of the above: their plan is to kill them all, steall all their land, and eradicate their culture. And as the genocide goes on – totally legitimized by the NATO sphere – the death cult keeps bombing anything in sight, perpetrating the balkanization of Syria, and expanding Eretz Israel.

Read more …

And the countries that send the forces will use it as a casus belli.

• Russia Will Target Multinational Forces in Ukraine (Kyle Anzalone)

The Russian Foreign Ministry said any troops from third countries deployed to Ukraine will become targets. European nations have discussed plans to send their soldiers to Ukraine if a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova explained that any country that joins a coalition of the willing and deploys troops to Ukraine will become targets. “We have repeatedly stated that a deployment of armed forces of other countries in Ukraine under any pretense would be absolutely unacceptable,” she said. “We regard this as preparations for foreign military intervention. We will consider these so-called ‘multinational forces’ as legitimate military targets,” she added.

Several European countries have said they would be willing to join a “coalition of the willing” to deploy soldiers to Ukraine after a ceasefire with Russia is reached. Earlier this month, UK Defense Minister John Healey said, “The prime minister has always been clear that he’s ready to put troops into Ukraine to help reinforce a ceasefire.” “The coalition of the willing” is an infamous phrase used by the George W. Bush administration to try to sell the Iraq War. Moscow says it is unwilling to enter into a ceasefire with Ukraine and is seeking a permanent end to the conflict that addresses the Kremlin’s security concerns.

Multiple leaks throughout the war have exposed that a small number of American and NATO troops are inside Ukraine. However, Europeans are now discussing a large-scale deployment meant as a deterrent to a future Russian invasion. The escalating support for Kiev has led some in the Kremlin to argue for Moscow to take a more aggressive position against Ukraine’s Western backers. Dmitry Medvedev, former Russian President and current deputy head of the National Security Council, suggested launching preemptive attacks. “What is happening today is a proxy war, but in essence it is a full-fledged war,” Medvedev, who is now a senior Russian national security official, told the Tass news agency.

“We need to act accordingly. Respond in full. And if necessary, launch preventative strikes.” However, Medvedev also acknowledged that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ruled out attacking more European countries. “Let me remind you that our president stated unequivocally: Russia does not intend to go to war with NATO or ‘attack Europe’. Such claims by Western politicians are utter nonsense.” He continued, “I would also like to add that this kind of drivel is deliberately injected into the information space to destabilize an already difficult situation. It is yet another front in the West’s open war against us.”

Read more …

Anything written before Friday is old.

• The World Woke Up (Victor Davis Hanson)

In less than six months, the entire world has been turned upside down. There is no longer such a thing as conventional wisdom or the status quo. The unthinkable has become the banal. Take illegal immigration—remember the 10,000 daily illegal entries under former President Joe Biden? Recall the only solution was supposedly “comprehensive immigration reform”—a euphemism for mass amnesties. Now, there is no such thing as daily new illegal immigration. It simply disappeared with commonsense enforcement of existing immigration laws—and a new president. How about the 40,000-50,000 shortfall in military recruitment? Remember all the causes that the generals cited for their inability to enlist soldiers: generational gangs, obesity, drugs, and stiff competition with private industry? And now?

In just six months, recruitment targets are already met; the issue is mostly moot. Why? The new Pentagon flipped the old, canceling its racist DEI programs and assuring the rural, middle-class Americans—especially white males—that they were not systemically racist after all. Instead, they were reinvited to enlist as the critical combat cohort who died at twice their demographic share in Iraq and Afghanistan. How about the “end of the NATO crisis,” supposedly brought on by a bullying U.S.? Now the vast majority of NATO members have met their pledges to spend 2% of gross domestic product on defense, which will soon increase to 5%. Iconic neutrals like Sweden and Finland have become front-line NATO nations, arming to the teeth. The smiling NATO secretary-general even called Trump the “daddy” of the alliance.

What about indomitable, all-powerful, theocratic Iran, the scourge of the Middle East for nearly 50 years? Although it had never won a war in the last half-century, its terrorist surrogates—Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis—were supposedly too dangerous to provoke. Now? Most of their expeditionary terrorists are neutered, and their leaders are in hiding or dead. Iran has no air force, no real navy, no air defenses, and no active nuclear weapons program. Its safety apparently depends only on the mood of the U.S. or Israel on any given day, not to fly into its airspace and take out its missiles, nuclear sites, generals, or theocrats at will. What happened to the supposedly inevitable recession, hyperinflation, stock market collapse, unemployment spikes, and global trade war that last spring economists assured us would hit by summer?

Job growth is strong, and April’s inflation rate is the lowest in four years. GDP is still steady. The stock market hit a record high. Trade partners are renegotiating their surpluses with the U.S. It turns out that staying in the U.S. consumer market is the top priority of our trading partners. It seems their preexisting and mostly undisclosed profits were large enough to afford reasonable U.S. symmetrical tariffs. For now, news of tax cuts, deregulation, “drill, baby, drill” energy policies displacing Green New Deal strangulation, and $8-$10 trillion in potential foreign investment has encouraged—rather than deterred—business. Then there were our marquee elite universities, whose prestige, riches, and powerful alumni made them answerable to no one. And now, after the executive and congressional crackdown on their decades of hubris?

Supposedly brilliant university presidents have resigned in shame. The public has caught on to their grant surcharge gouging. Campuses have backed off their arrogant defiance of the Supreme Court’s civil rights rulings. They are panicked about the public exposure of their systemic antisemitism. They are scrambling to explain away their institutionalized ideological bias and their tawdry profit-making schemes and mass recruitment of wealthy foreign students from illiberal regimes. So, the mighty Ivy League powerhouses are now humbling themselves to cut a deal to save their financial hides and hopefully return to their proper mission of disinterested education. What happened to the trans juggernaut of sex as a social construct and its bookend gospel that biological men could dominate women’s sports?

People woke up. They were no longer afraid to state that sex is binary and biologically determined. And biological men who dominate women’s sports are bullies, not heroes. Where are the millionaire-scamming architects of Black Lives Matter now? Where is the “DEI now, tomorrow, and forever” conventional wisdom? Where is professor Ibram X. Kendi and his $30,000 Zoom lessons on how to fight racism by being racist? They have all been exposed as the race hustlers they always were. Their creed that it is OK for supposed victims to be racist victimizers themselves was exposed as an absurd con. So, what flipped everything?

We were living in an “emperor has no clothes” make-believe world for the last few years. The people knew establishment narratives were absurd, and our supposed experts were even more ridiculous. But few—until now—had the guts to scream “the emperor is naked” to dispel the fantasies. When they finally did, reality returned.

Read more …

“.. it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity..”

• Red, White, and Bitcoin (Beirne)

Bitcoin may feel futuristic, but when you peel away its digital veneer, it is just the latest chapter in a 2,600-year story of value, trust, and human ingenuity. Having reached record highs, Bitcoin has been making headlines as nations declare strategic stockpiles and corporate America embraces the new asset class. Why now? The answer lies in a pattern as old as civilization itself: When governments corrupt a currency, people innovate their way to something better. As the saying goes, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.” When the first coin clanked into existence in 600 B.C., it was not merely a gold and silver alloy stamped with the face of the Lydian king.

It was a financial revolution. For the first time, people could move past the inefficiencies of barter and instead use a medium of exchange to trade. But this value was not in the sparkle; it was the individuals’ collective understanding that these coins have worth. The integrity of that system has waxed and waned over the ensuing millennia, typically driven by governmental spending policies. The silver-backed Roman denarii enabled the empire to flourish, but as subsequent emperors diluted its value – reducing their silver content to fund wars and build grand palaces – citizens lost faith in their currency. When Emperor Nero reduced silver content from 98% to 83% in A.D. 64, Romans began hoarding old coins and rejecting new ones. By A.D. 260, the denarius contained just 5% silver. Inflation spiraled and commerce crumbled, contributing to the eventual fall of the empire.

The United States has battled currency crises since our nation’s birth, but unlike Rome, America has consistently innovated solutions along the way. After we declared independence from Britain, the Continental Congress printed the nation’s first paper money. Called “Continentals,” it was backed by neither gold nor silver – simply by belief in its value. While gold and silver are at least relatively scarce metals that constrain supply, paper can be printed. And that is precisely what the first U.S. government did. Desperate to pay troops and buy supplies necessary to wage the Revolutionary War, Congress turned to making more Continentals. Bills flooded the market, driving down value as Americans questioned whether the new nation could honor its promises.

In 1777, one patriot complained to his father as inflation spiked by an estimated 200%, writing, “America has much more to fear from the effects of large quantities of paper money than from the operations of British Generals.” Prices climbed so rapidly that George Washington himself came to refuse Continentals as payment. In fact, it became common to describe something of little value as “not worth a Continental.” The currency became such a laughingstock that sailors paid in the bills would sew them onto their clothes and parade through town to mock it. But rather than crumble like the Roman Empire, the U.S. innovated: This currency crisis was a driving force that led our Founding Fathers to scrap the American government under the Articles of Confederation and draft our current Constitution.

This change represented more than political reform – it was monetary advancement, shifting from discretionary to rule-based money. The new U.S. government adopted a bimetallic standard in 1792, which tied the value of dollars to both gold and silver. The country eventually simplified its approach by shifting to a de facto gold standard in 1834, which lasted until 1971 when President Nixon abandoned it in favor of fiat currency. Like the Continentals before it, the dollar has since been backed by belief in its value: full faith and credit of the U.S. government. And then came the 2008 financial crisis. Lehman Brothers fell, banks wobbled, and the public? They started asking: “What is money?”

It was then, from the digital shadows, that an anonymous figure – Satoshi Nakamoto – dropped a whitepaper like a patriot dropping a leaflet on the eve of the Revolutionary War: Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. No emperors. No banks. Just math, cryptography, and an unbreakable record called the blockchain. A new kind of trust was born – not in a ruler, but in code. What was initially viewed as an interesting hypothetical idea was quickly put to real-world use. Users beget more users. Trust grows. Entrepreneurs dream. It’s a full-blown historical saga unfolding in real time.

Bitcoin has risen above the other cryptocurrencies it inspired, in large part due to its scarcity: no longer could an Emperor add bits of cheap copper to silver coins or Congress print more paper because it is hardcoded that only 21 million Bitcoin will ever exist. Further, all Bitcoin transactions are verified by a decentralized network of approximately 20,000 individuals’ computers across the world, all checking one another beyond politicians’ control. In an age of runaway government spending, investors have turned to those scarce Bitcoin that no government can dilute. A decentralized system that guards the people from government domination – how American is that!

It is no coincidence that Bitcoin has skyrocketed to a $2 trillion valuation just as the U.S. national debt has reached record highs. Researchers debate how long fiat currencies last on average throughout history, with some placing time of death at between 27 and 35 years. Since the U.S. has been off the gold standard for over 50 years, history suggests the dollar is poised for decline. People are simply asking the age-old question: What is money, really? As trust is shaken in paper money due to inflation and ballooning federal spending, many are turning to innovation. Even nations themselves have begun to set up strategic reserves. In fact, the United States is the largest known state holder of Bitcoin – once again positioning America at the forefront of monetary evolution.

As John Adams advised in 1787, “All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise not from the defects of the Constitution, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” It is incumbent upon Americans to arm themselves with knowledge and engage in the age-old American tradition of challenging broken systems with better ideas in the pursuit of liberty.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Aaron Siri
https://twitter.com/newstart_2024/status/1946312859824099353

Letterman

CBDC

lipitor

Yellowstone

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Debt Rattle July 19 2025

Jul 192025
 
 July 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:00 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  41 Responses »


Paul Gauguin Tahitian scene 1892

 

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)
• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)
• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)
• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)
• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)
• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)
• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)
• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)
• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)
• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)
• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)
• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)
• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)
• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)
• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)
• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

 

 

 

 

tucker

letter

 

 

 

 

Obama, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, Susan Rice, Andrew McCabe, Loretta Lynch. At a meeting in the White House. Start there.

Q: what effect has the made up smear had on today’s relations with Russia?

• Tulsi Gabbard: ‘Overwhelming Evidence’ Of Obama Coup Plot Against Trump (RT)

Former President Barack Obama’s administration deliberately manipulated intelligence to frame Russia for interfering in the 2016 presidential election, according to newly declassified documents released on Friday by America’s Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard unveiled more than 100 pages of emails, memos, and internal communications, which she described as “overwhelming evidence” of a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials to politicize intelligence and launch the multi-year Trump–Russia collusion investigation. She dubbed it “a treasonous conspiracy to subvert the will of the American people.” The scandal severely damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, leading to sanctions, asset seizures, and a breakdown in normal diplomacy.

https://twitter.com/DNIGabbard/status/1946271402971312514?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1946271402971312514%7Ctwgr%5E5e032d175c5299fac3a017ebc97f6cb0f695d014%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F621667-russiagate-probe-trump-obama%2F

”This intelligence was weaponized,” Gabbard said. “It was used as a justification for endless smears, for sanctions from Congress, and for covert investigations.” She added: “When key internal assessments found that Russia ‘did not impact recent U.S. election results,’ those findings were suppressed.” “For months before the 2016 election, the Intelligence Community maintained that Russia lacked both the intent and capability to hack U.S. elections,” Gabbard noted. “But once President Trump won, everything changed.” One document — a draft President’s Daily Brief dated December 8, 2016 — stated Russia “did not impact recent U.S. election results” through cyberattacks. The report, prepared by the CIA, NSA, FBI, DHS, and other agencies, found no evidence of voting interference.

Yet Fox News reported on Friday that the document was pulled — “based on new guidance,” according to internal emails. Hours later, a high-level Situation Room meeting took place, attended by officials including DNI James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

According to declassified notes, attendees agreed to produce a new intelligence assessment at President Obama’s request. That report, released on January 6, 2017, claimed Russia had intervened in the election to help Donald Trump — directly contradicting earlier assessments. Gabbard claims the revised assessment leaned on the discredited Steele Dossier — compiled by a former British spy — while sidelining dissenting views within the intelligence apparatus. “This was not intelligence gathering,” Gabbard stated. “It was narrative building.”

Confirmed as DNI earlier this year — after a contentious process — Gabbard says she has forwarded the documents to the Department of Justice. She has urged investigations into former CIA Director John Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey, who are reportedly facing criminal inquiries. “No matter how powerful, every person involved must be brought to justice,” she stressed. “Our nation’s integrity depends on accountability.” “The integrity of our democratic republic depends on full accountability,” Gabbard concluded. “Nothing less will restore the public’s trust — and ensure nothing like this ever happens again.”

Read more …

“..1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release..”

Q: why does Kash Patel’s FBI look for mentions of Trump?

• FBI Allegedly Told Agents to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files (Sp.)

The FBI allegedly urged the agents to track US President Donald Trump references in the Epstein case, US Senator Dick Durbin said in a letter addressed to Attorney General Pam Bondi. Durbin claimed the FBI was pressured to assign around 1,000 staff to work 24-hour shifts in March to review 100,000 Epstein-related records for rapid release, with untrained personnel from the New York office reportedly assisting in the process. “My office was told that these personnel were instructed to “flag” any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” Durbin said. Durbin went on to say that despite weeks of intensive review, it took the US Department of Justice (DOJ) over three more months to conclude there was no incriminating “client list.”

He added that the July 7 memo omitted any mention of a whistleblower or promised documents, and suggested public trust was further eroded by the release of allegedly altered surveillance footage from outside Epstein’s cell. Durbin questioned the accuracy of previous public statements regarding Epstein-related records and said the lack of transparency may undermine trust in the DOJ’s July 7 conclusion that no incriminating “client list” exists. In his letter, Senator Durbin requested answers by August 1, including whether all Epstein files have been personally reviewed, why a “client list” was publicly claimed in February but not released, and details about a whistleblower’s disclosure of additional records. He also asked for the names of ethics officials consulted, reasons for assigning 1,000 FBI staff to 24-hour shifts, and why mentions of Trump were flagged and how those records were handled.

Read more …

Russiagate all over again.

• Guess Who’s Behind WSJ’s Trump-Epstein ‘Bombshell’? (Margolis)

The Wall Street Journal embarrassed itself Thursday by hyping a so-called Trump-Epstein “bombshell” that amounted to nothing more than a disputed birthday card from 2003 that they won’t show, and that Trump denies writing and is now suing over. The rest of the story was recycled material long in the public domain. Desperate to revive the left’s failed narrative tying Trump to Epstein, the Journal grasped at straws while ignoring Epstein’s far more substantial connections to powerful Democrats like Bill Clinton, who flew on Epstein’s jet multiple times and visited his island — facts the media still downplays to this day. Joe Palazzolo, one of the Wall Street Journal reporters who broke the “blockbuster” story, previously worked for Main Justice, which is his only prior reporting experience listed in his bio.

Joe joined the Journal in 2010 from trade publication Main Justice, where he covered the U.S. Justice Department. Before moving to the investigations team in 2019, he reported on national legal affairs for the Journal for seven years, focusing on the nation’s prisons, courts, gun laws and law enforcement. Why does this matter? Well, Main Justice is a publication founded by Mary Jacoby. That name may not be familiar to you, but she is the wife of Glenn Simpson — the guy who founded Fusion GPS. That’s the outfit Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid to concoct the infamous Steele Dossier that fueled the Russian collusion hoax. Guess where Glenn and Mary cut their teeth before exporting their political dirty tricks to the broader media? That’s right —The Wall Street Journal.

The incestuous relationships aren’t even hidden; they practically serve them up on a silver platter and still expect us to act surprised when another so-called “bombshell” arrives containing every DNC talking point, T’s crossed and I’s dotted. President Trump isn’t playing along this time. He’s suing the Wall Street Journal, calling the Epstein birthday letter story complete fiction, and arguing that basic journalistic integrity—like letting him respond to an accusation—was discarded in the left’s rush to get another “scandal” published. Considering the history here, it’s not just plausible, it’s likely. How many times have we watched these operatives masquerade as journalists, deliver a conveniently-timed anti-Trump narrative, and then retreat behind the thin veil of press freedom when challenged?

Jacoby’s not just media-connected; her father is a longtime executive at Stephens Investments, whose attorney back in the day was none other than Hillary Clinton at the Rose Law Firm. It’s all part of the same Clinton-DNC-Fusion GPS web that keeps resurfacing every time there’s a new “scandal” targeting Trump. Once again, a Trump “bombshell” traces back to the same partisan ecosystem that gave us the Steele Dossier. The deeper you look, the clearer it becomes: This isn’t journalism; it’s narrative warfare. And after this stunt from the Journal, it’s no wonder Americans are tuning the media out in record numbers.

Read more …

Sounds like a narrow escape. What about EU countries?

• RFK Jr. Rejects Dystopian WHO Pandemic Amendments (Salgado)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just announced the defeat of authoritarian World Health Organization amendments that tended toward an anti-freedom, unhealthful, unscientific dystopia. Kennedy joined with Secretary of State Marco Rubio to formally reject the amendments. Critics have long warned these modifications would essentially have given the WHO total control to dictate the United States’ national response to anything it arbitrarily labeled a pandemic.

“The proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations open the door to the kind of narrative management, propaganda, and censorship that we saw during the COVID pandemic,” Kennedy said in a Friday press release. “The United States can cooperate with other nations without jeopardizing our civil liberties, without undermining our Constitution, and without ceding away America’s treasured sovereignty.” This follows Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO, as the press release noted: “The amended IHR would give the WHO the ability to order global lockdowns, travel restrictions, or any other measures it sees fit to respond to nebulous “potential public health risks.” These regulations are set to become binding if not rejected by July 19, 2025, regardless of the United States’ withdrawal from the WHO.”

Rubio also issued a statement. “Terminology throughout the amendments to the 2024 International Health Regulations is vague and broad, risking WHO-coordinated international responses that focus on political issues like solidarity, rather than rapid and effective actions,” he said. “Our Agencies have been and will continue to be clear: we will put Americans first in all our actions and we will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans’ speech, privacy, or personal liberties.” Dr. Robert Malone, mRNA pioneer and critic of the WHO’s disastrous COVID-19 policies, celebrated: “Big win indeed. The worm turns, and elections have consequences.” They certainly do.

The IHR amendments would have allowed the WHO to dictate lockdowns and other policies to the United States if it determined that there were “potential public health risks.” And the WHO got to define exactly what constituted a requisite health risk. That could be a cold virus, bird flu, even potentially obesity — there was a lot of latitude for the WHO, which proved itself untrustworthy during COVID. Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) also praised the news. “WHO is an unaccountable international organization that hands individuals’ healthcare freedoms to corrupt bureaucrats,” he stated. “I’m thankful for Secretary Kennedy’s firm stance against WHO’s Pandemic Agreement that will protect Americans’ health freedom and privacy. Let’s Make America Great and Healthy Again.”

Read more …

Shaking so many hands you get bruises on yours.

• White House Explains Trump’s Swollen Ankles and Bruised Hand (RT)

The White House has released a memo from President Donald Trump’s physician explaining recent visible changes in his limbs, which some observers had taken as indicators of a serious health condition. In a memo issued Thursday, Dr. Sean P. Barbabella said Trump has been diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency, a condition he described as “benign” and common among people over the age of 70. Trump, 79, was recently seen with swelling in his legs, which Dr. Barbabella attributed to the condition. Chronic venous insufficiency is typically age-related and involves malfunctioning of one-way valves in the veins, which are responsible for returning blood to the heart.

The legs are often affected because the veins there must work harder against gravity. People who spend extended periods standing are more susceptible to the disorder. According to the statement, no signs of more serious vascular conditions – such as deep vein thrombosis – were found. Barbabella also explained that recurring bruising on the back of Trump’s right hand was the result of “soft tissue irritation from frequent handshaking” and preventive aspirin use. While swelling in Trump’s ankles gained attention last week, the bruises on his hand have been visible since at least October, fueling speculation that he was undergoing intravenous treatment.

Trump and his staff have repeatedly said the marks are due to vigorous handshaking. Many senior US officials are of advanced age. Critics argue that the country’s political system favors seniority and has effectively turned into a gerontocracy. President Joe Biden’s age became a major campaign issue during last year’s presidential election. His aides were accused of hiding signs of cognitive decline to keep him in the race. Biden dropped out of the campaign less than four months before Election Day after a disastrous debate performance against Trump.

Read more …

“With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted..”

• Navarro: Why Retail Sales Growth Exceeds all Wall Street Projections (CTH)

White House Trade and Economic Advisor Peter Navarro takes a well deserved victory lap on the latest U.S. consumer sales news. The Census Bureau report yesterday highlighted that consumer sales remain strong at +0.6%, significantly higher than all economists forecast. Retail sales growth is important because approximately two-thirds of the U.S. GDP growth is driven by consumer sales. With inflation low, retail sales high, and with a previously reported drop in U.S. imports, the second quarter GDP is likely to be much stronger than anyone previously predicted. Thus, Peter Navarro is leaning forward against the naysayers. This is essentially a repeat of the 2017/2018 economic outcome from President Trump’s first term in office.

The tariffs, which are applied to the ‘cost’ side of the dynamic, are mostly being absorbed by major producing nations who are reliant upon export to the U.S. market. Simultaneously, the tariffs are generating income – essentially exfiltrating foreign wealth and returning those funds to the USA; a complete reversal of the rust-belt dynamic. What Peter Navarro outlines is the core of MAGAnomics. This is also the baseline for our CTH assembly in support of economic nationalism, which is why we ended up in conflict with the Chamber of Commerce Republicans. Tariffs are a tool to leverage reciprocal trade, and as long as nations like China continue taking measures to subsidize their exports, the tariffs simultaneously take wealth (those subsidies) from Beijing and return it to the USA.

This reality has always been the model we predicted would be successful for Americans, and I will remind everyone that ONLY DONALD TRUMP could deliver this MAGAnomic program. Everything else, Epstein, Musk, etc. is chaff and countermeasures deployed by both Democrats and Republicans in an effort to take back control of the money flow. Remember, Democrats want power – Republicans want money. Democrats use money to get power, while Republicans use power to get money. This is how the two-wings of the DC UniParty vulture maintain status. You can see that if you take away the money, democrats lose power.

Simultaneously if you take away control of the money, the republicans go bananas. This dual reality forms the baseline of the elite club opposition against President Trump. At the core of the opposition you find money, control of the USA treasury as a weapon. When you understand that aspect, you understand the motives of Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell. FED Chair Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates is an attempt to assist both wings of DC by trying -and failing- to influence the money flows. Democrats support Powell’s approach because they want power. Republicans are willfully blind to Powell’s approach because they want to get back in control of the money. Pro-America economic policy, MAGAnomics, is like kryptonite to Washington DC.

Read more …

People easily get nervous about their pensions.

• Trump Eyes Executive Order To Open Up Retirement Funds To Crypto: FT (CT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly set to sign an executive order that could allow American 401(k) retirement plans to invest in alternative assets outside of stocks and bonds, such as cryptocurrencies. The executive order could be signed sometime this week, the Financial Times reported on Thursday, citing three people who have been briefed on the plans. The new 401(k) investment options could run across a broad spectrum of assets, including digital assets, metals and funds focused on infrastructure deals, corporate takeovers and private loans. The executive order would instruct Washington regulatory agencies to investigate the best path forward for 401(k) plans to start investing in crypto, and investigate any remaining obstacles to making it a reality, according to the Financial Times.

However, in a statement to Cointelegraph, White House spokesman Kush Desai said nothing should be deemed as official unless it comes from Trump himself. “President Trump is committed to restoring prosperity for everyday Americans and safeguarding their economic future,” he said. “No decisions should be deemed official, however, unless they come from President Trump himself.” In May, the US Labor Department rescinded guidance issued during the Biden administration that limited the inclusion of cryptocurrency in 401(k) retirement plans. Meanwhile, in April, Cointelegraph reported that financial services company Fidelity, which has $5.9 trillion in assets under management, introduced a new retirement account allowing Americans to invest in crypto.

A 401(k) is a retirement savings plan offered by many US employers that allows employees to save and invest a portion of their paycheck in the funds before taxes are taken out. Typically, investments focus on mutual funds, exchange-traded funds, stocks and bonds, depending on the plan. The 401(k) market held $8.9 trillion in assets as of Sept. 30, 2024, in more than 715,000 plans. At a state level, in March, North Carolina lawmakers already introduced bills in the House and Senate that could see the state’s treasurer allocate up to 5% of various state retirement funds into crypto like Bitcoin. In November last year, the United Kingdom-based pension specialist Cartwright reported that an “unnamed scheme” had made a 3% allocation of Bitcoin into its pension fund. Meanwhile, Japan’s Government Pension Investment Fund was also considering Bitcoin as a potential diversification tool in March last year.

Read more …

“Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force..”

• Ukraine’s ‘Rout’ Will Continue – Medvedev (RT)

Russia will continue to rout Ukrainian forces on the battlefield despite the EU’s decision to impose its 18th package of sanctions against the country, former President Dmitry Medvedev said on Friday. The EU member states had approved the sweeping economic restrictions earlier in the day, mostly targeting Russia’s energy and financial sectors, in another attempt to pressure the country over the Ukraine conflict. Moscow has repeatedly condemned the sanctions as “illegal.” The measures will not derail Moscow with regards to the conflict any more than the previous 17 packages did, according to Medvedev, who now serves as deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council.

“Our economy will, of course, survive, and the rout of the Banderite regime will continue. Strikes against objects in the so-called Ukraine, including Kiev, will be carried out with increasing force,” he wrote on Telegram. Moscow should politically steer away from the EU and distance itself from the bloc, he added. Brussels’ new sanctions bar all transactions with 22 additional banks, as well as with the Russian Direct Investment Fund. The package also imposes a ban on utilizing the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were mostly disabled by sabotage in 2022 and have remained unused since.

The ban also bars the provision of goods and services for the pipeline, “thus preventing the completion, maintenance, operation and any future use” of the gas infrastructure, the European Council said in a statement on Friday. Additionally, the new restrictions add a further 105 ships to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” engaged in transporting Russian crude and bypassing the bloc’s “price cap” on Moscow’s oil exports. The sanctions lower the price ceiling and add a mechanism for adjusting to future changes in market conditions. Russia has “built up a certain immunity” to sanctions and “adapted to life” under them, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Friday, commenting on the EU decision.

Read more …

Guess they don’t mind looking stupid.

• EU Reveals 18th Sanctions Package Against Moscow (RT)

The EU has managed to approve its 18th sanctions package against Russia over the Ukraine conflict, targeting Moscow’s energy and banking sectors, the bloc’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has said. The Kremlin has decried the unilateral restrictions by Brussels as “illegal.” A previous attempt to greenlight the package, which requires the approval of all 27 member states, failed earlier this week due to opposition from Slovakia. However, Bratislava said on Thursday that it would be “counterproductive” to block the sanctions further, after it received guarantees from the European Commission regarding the availability of gas and oil. Following the meeting of EU ambassadors in Brussels on Friday, Kallas wrote in a post on X that the bloc “just approved one of its strongest sanctions packages against Russia to date.”

According to Kallas, the bloc will maintain economic pressure on Moscow until the Ukraine conflict is settled. Russia has on numerous occasions expressed its readiness to explore a diplomatic solution with Kiev, but insists that it should be legally binding and address the root causes of the crisis. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted later on Friday that Moscow “repeatedly said that we consider such unilateral restrictions to be illegal. We oppose them.” Russia has already obtained “a certain immunity” and adapted to functioning under the sanctions, he stressed. Peskov also pointed out that the economic curbs are a “double-edged sword,” which creates “a negative effect” not only for Moscow, but also for the state which impose them.

The new sanctions ban transactions with 22 Russian banks and the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), and forbids the use of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which were crippled by underwater blasts in 2022 and remain inoperable, diplomatic sources have told Euronews. The measures also upgrade the EU price cap on Russian crude oil, fixed at $60 per barrel, replacing it with a dynamic mechanism that remains 15% lower than the average market price, according to the sources. In addition, the curbs add another 105 vessels to a blacklist of what Brussels calls the “shadow fleet” involved in transporting Russian oil, bypassing the bloc’s restrictions, they said. This puts the overall number of tanker ships denied access to EU ports and service at over 400.

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Russia has redirected its energy sales to Asia, with China and India being the main buyers. Some member countries, including Hungary and Slovakia, have been critical of the EU sanctions against Russia, saying that they harm the bloc’s economy, while being unable to stop the fighting between Moscow and Kiev.

Read more …

“Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone..”

• Putin Aide Gives Verdict On New EU Sanctions (RT)

EU sanctions on Russia are far more damaging to the bloc’s member states than they are to Moscow, presidential investment envoy Kirill Dmitriev said on Telegram on Friday. Brussels announced the adoption of its 18th package of sanctions against Russia earlier in the day, targeting the country’s hydrocarbon exports and banking sector. One of the financial institutions sanctioned was the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), of which Dmitriev is the CEO. According to the presidential envoy, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen pushed for sanctions on the fund because the RDIF “facilitates the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, promotes dialogue between Russia and the United States, and invests in the growth of the Russian economy.”

The EU elite is afraid of peace and continues to remain captive to hostile narratives, destroying the economy of the entire EU with its own hands.The economic restrictions are destructive to bloc member states, depriving them of stable energy supplies and access to the Russian market, Dmitriev argued. “Last year, despite all the sanctions pressure, Russia’s GDP grew by 4.3%, versus a 0.7% growth rate in the Eurozone,” he said. The RDIF calls for “unwinding the sanctions spiral,” Dmitriev said. He argued that, despite the imposition of more than 30,000 sanctions against Russia, the measures have failed to force Moscow into acting “in opposition to Russian national interests.”

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday that Moscow has developed “a certain immunity” to the Western sanctions. According to Russian President Vladimir Putin, such unilateral economic restrictions harm the economies of the very states that turn to them. “The more sanctions are imposed, the greater the damage to the imposers,” at the Eurasian Economic Union summit in Minsk last month.

Read more …

“This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year..”

• Brussels Budget Plan Could Destroy EU – Orban (RT)

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has sharply criticized the European Union’s proposed seven-year budget, claiming its primary objective is to facilitate Ukraine’s accession and warning that it could spell disaster for the bloc. Orban, a frequent critic of the EU leadership, blasted the draft Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028-2034, which was unveiled earlier this week by the European Commission, during an interview with Kossuth Radio on Friday. “This budget would destroy the European Union. I don’t think this budget will even survive next year,” Orban said. He predicted that the EU’s executive would either have to withdraw the proposal or make significant revisions before national governments would consider approving it.

The Hungarian leader accused the commission of proposing reckless cuts, particularly in agricultural subsidies, likening the approach to an unskilled surgeon who fatally injures a patient during a botched procedure. Orban reiterated his long-standing claim that Brussels is advancing foreign policy goals – namely, integration of Ukraine – at the expense of EU citizens. “This budget has only one obvious purpose, and that is to admit Ukraine to the European Union,” he said, citing financial analysts who estimate that as much as 25% of the funds could be directed toward benefiting Kiev in various forms.

The Hungarian leader said he did not expect Ukraine to qualify for EU membership anytime soon, adding that officials in Brussels are presenting Kiev as “already overripe” for entry. He cautioned that once Ukraine were admitted, the decision would be virtually irreversible regardless of future consequences. The European Commission has defended the proposed €2 trillion ($2.33 trillion) budget, saying it would increase flexibility, reduce bureaucracy, and boost economic competitiveness. Orban, however, dismissed it as a “budget of hopelessness,” better suited for a bloc “preparing for stagnation and merely trying to avoid disintegration.”

Read more …

Talking about the EU…

• France a ‘Fiscal Time Bomb’ For EU – Bloomberg (RT)

France’s efforts to tackle its growing deficit have reignited concerns about EU stability, with financial markets bracing for the fallout, Bloomberg has reported, citing ING Groep NV strategists. The euro dropped to a one-month low this week, driven by tensions over French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou’s massive deficit-cutting plan. His proposals, including slashing public sector jobs and curbing welfare spending, could fuel debate in France’s minority government and undermine investor confidence, the strategists warned. In a note seen by Bloomberg, currency strategist Francesco Pesole warned on Wednesday that while the euro’s decline was largely dollar-driven, it was also due to political and fiscal challenges in France.

“The French deficit story has been very much in the background as of late, but [Tuesday] probably served as a reminder that it is a ticking bomb for EU sentiment,” Pesole wrote, adding “We could start seeing some FX spillovers in the coming months.” Bayrou’s €43.8 billion ($50.9 billion) plan targets a deficit that reached 5.8% of GDP last year – double the EU’s 3% limit. He warned on Tuesday that excessive debt posed a “mortal danger” and proposed scrapping public holidays to boost productivity and freezing pensions. The proposals have faced backlash, with left-wing parties accusing the government of prioritizing military spending over social welfare. Jean-Luc Melenchon, leader of La France Insoumise, called for Bayrou’s resignation, saying “these injustices cannot be tolerated any longer.”

France’s military budget is slated to rise to €64 billion in 2027, double what the country spent in 2017. President Emmanuel Macron has announced an additional €6.5 billion in funding over the next two years, citing heightened threats to European security. A new defense review released this month warned of a potential “major war” in Europe by 2030, listing Moscow among the top threats. The Kremlin has dismissed claims it is planning to attack the West, accusing NATO of using Russia as a pretext for military expansion. Bayrou, who has survived eight no-confidence motions, must secure parliamentary backing for his proposals before presenting the full budget in October. The right-wing National Rally party has opposed the cuts and called for another vote on his government.

Read more …

Quite a few have woken up.

• Freedom Caucus Attempts to Block Central Bank Digital Currency (Caldwell)

After slowing down the Republican leadership’s attempt to advance a bundle of cryptocurrency market reform bills, the conservative House Freedom Caucus and its allies appear to have secured a promise to prohibit the Federal Reserve from issuing a digital U.S. dollar. Caucus members contend that’s a victory for Americans’ freedoms. The deal allowed for House Republicans to advance three important pieces of cryptocurrency legislation and stick to a sufficient timeline for passing a rescissions bill defunding public broadcasting and foreign aid facing a Friday deadline. “This is a significant win for the American people as a government-controlled digital currency poses a direct threat to financial privacy and economic freedom,” House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., wrote on the social media platform X on Wednesday night after securing an agreement with House leadership to put anti-central bank digital currency provisions in the annual defense authorization bill.

“By securing these protections, we will be taking a critical step to stop government overreach and to preserve individual liberty,” he added. But the agreement came only after a multiday slog of negotiations on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, House GOP leadership brought a rule to the House floor to advance three cryptocurrency bills: the GENIUS, CLARITY, and Anti-CBDC Surveillance acts. The rule ultimately failed. The GENIUS and CLARITY acts resolve questions about the regulatory framework surrounding cryptocurrency, which has long been messy and decentralized, with a number of regulators navigating vague boundaries. But Freedom Caucus members and their allies expressed concerns that Congress might pass these first two acts, but neglect to advance safeguards against central bank digital currency.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, explained Wednesday that he and his conservative cohort view a government digital currency as a threat to liberty and privacy. “We believe a line in the sand is that we’ve got to have an emphatic statement from the government of the United States that the government is not going to be tracking your money to prevent you from being able to buy guns … to buy gasoline, if they want to go to all [electric vehicles],” he said. “To prevent you from being able to live your life freely and be able to monitor your transactions like the Chinese Communist Party. We don’t do that here. This is a country that’s supposed to embrace freedom,” Roy said. The vote on the rule to advance the three crypto bills failed 196-223 on Tuesday when 13 Republicans joined Democrats in opposition, demanding that leadership embed anti-CBDC provisions into one of the other pieces of cryptocurrency legislation.

President Donald Trump met with the GOP holdouts at the White House on Tuesday night and shortly afterward announced he had come to a deal with the members, who “all agreed to vote tomorrow morning in favor of the rule.” The next day, Harris said, they had found a deal with the White House to insert anti-CBDC provisions into the CLARITY Act. “Under this agreement, the Rules Committee will reconvene later [Wednesday] to add clear, strong anti–central bank digital currency (CBDC) provisions to the CLARITY legislation,” he wrote. But the agreement ran into some headwinds quickly when the House Rules Committee canceled its planned 4 p.m. meeting. “There was some sort of an agreement that doesn’t appear to exist anymore, and that’s all I got to say,” said Roy.

Punchbowl News reported that much of this gridlock was due to worries from Chairman French Hill, R-Ark., of the Financial Services Committee and Chairman Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., of the Agriculture Committee, since adding anti-CBDC provisions might make passing the CLARITY Act more difficult. “I think those discussions actually continue,” Hill said Wednesday of Trump’s negotiations with holdouts. The Wednesday vote ended up being the longest recorded vote in the history of the House of Representatives, breaking a record that was set earlier this month when leadership advanced the budget reconciliation measure known as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.” The gridlock was ultimately resolved late in the night when leadership came up with a final compromise—inserting anti-CBDC provisions into the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

This compromise yielded the votes to advance the three cryptocurrency bills. The rule passed 217-212 after being held open for more than nine hours. “House Freedom Caucus Members reached an agreement tonight to advance the president’s cryptocurrency agenda and, as part of this agreement, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) will include strong anti–Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) protections in this must-pass legislation,” Harris wrote Wednesday night. He added, “This is exactly why the House Freedom Caucus fights—‘Freedom‘ is our middle name—and we will continue to fight to protect the rights of Americans every day.” House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., who created the anti-CBDC bill, also applauded integrating the CBDC legislation into the defense authorization bill.

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1945941691313144182

“Even Republicans years ago were saying ‘Oh, we’re falling behind the Chinese; they have the digital yuan.’ You know what they use that for? That is a surveillance tool,” he said Thursday. “That is completely against any American value that we know of, and we’ve got to prevent our central government from ever creating this surveillance tool here in the United States of America.” Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., who was a holdout throughout the process, spoke proudly of the deal. “We did what we set out to do. We went a little slower, and guess what—we got there a little faster,” he said shortly after the vote. “Big Brother loses once again.” Now, it will be up to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., to hold the Senate’s feet to the fire to keep the anti-CBDC provisions in the NDAA. The GENIUS Act ultimately passed on a 308-122 vote Thursday. The CLARITY Act also passed, 294-134. The Anti-CBDC Surveillance Act passed by a much narrower 219-210 margin. GENIUS will now go to the president’s desk for final signature.

Read more …

“..Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow..”

• Release Ghislaine Maxwell (Paul Craig Roberts)

Ghislaine has been convicted for being an accessory to Epstein’s sex-trafficking of underaged kids. But we now have it from President Trump and the Attorney General of the United States that there is no Epstein client list that provides proof that Epstein was engaged in sex-trafficking for “at least a decade” as the BBC claims. Did Epstein keep all his clients, dates, times, and partners in his head? If there is no client list and nothing in the Epstein file, how were Epstein and Ghislaine convicted? Where is the evidence? As officially there is no evidence, Ghislaine’s attorneys, unless they are bought off or threatened, should have her out of prison tomorrow. Trump and Bondi obviously did not realize the consequences of denying the undeniable. Their denial has not disposed of the problem but has elevated it.

But what if there was no sex-trafficking? What if Epstein’s operation was a honey pot entrapment of American elites? Epstein did not need to make money sex-trafficking underage kids. He was well endowed by Mossad. Epstein’s job was to provide blackmail information that Israel could use to force the foreign policy of the United States to conform with the foreign policy of Israel. He succeeded. The American Establishment, those on the client list, called on Trump as did Netanyahu. Unless you are insouciant, you have noticed that Netanyahu rushed to the White House for the third time in six months, allegedly to discuss the Iranian threat. But there was no news conference. There has been no reporting of what was discussed. Such an important meeting, and no reportable results.

My take is that Netanyahu appeared in order to add Israel’s heavy weight to that of the ruling American Establishment that release of Epstein information is a no-no. If the Epstein files are released, then all the years of work, expense, and effort put into collecting blackmail capability over the American ruling class is wasted. Once the files are released and the information is pubic, Israel’s blackmail information is useless. Moreover, it becomes public knowledge that Israel was blackmailing the American elite to serve Israel’s, not America’s interest. The American Establishment cannot afford to have itself discredited, and Mossad cannot afford to have its blackmail information over the ruling American Establishment made worthless by its public exposure. That, dear reader, is the story of the Epstein Saga.

Read more …

“Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit..”

• American AI Could Die in Court Before It Ever Takes Off (Rotella)

“Uh oh—have you guys completed your income tax? Things kind of happened real fast down there, and I need an extension.”—Apollo 13 astronaut Jack Swigert. Even in space, Americans worry about taxes. That’s not a screenwriter’s joke. Hours before Apollo 13 almost ended in disaster, astronaut Jack Swigert, called in as a last-minute replacement, wasn’t worried about launch. He was worried about filing his taxes. Only in America could bureaucracy follow you into orbit. That story says everything about our national identity. We cherish the rule of law. We believe in due process. But in the race to lead in artificial intelligence, it’s becoming clear: The very systems we treasure may be the ones slowing us down.

The 2 Biggest Threats to US Artificial Intelligence Leadership. Right now, America is out front in both generative AI (which predicts content) and agentic AI (which makes autonomous decisions). But two very American forces are putting that lead at risk:

(1) A regulatory Rubik’s Cube. Congress recently passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to jumpstart AI innovation. But it stripped out a crucial provision: a 10-year moratorium on conflicting state-level AI laws. Now, companies face 50 different interpretations of what AI is allowed to do. Some states require bias audits. Others impose disclosure mandates. A tool that’s legal in Florida could get fined in California. Even top-tier compliance lawyers can’t map it all out fast enough. Because AI models cross state lines the moment they’re deployed, this isn’t just inefficient, it’s paralyzing.

(2) A litigation gold rush. Trial lawyers have found their next deep-pocketed target: AI. I say this as someone who used to be one of them and now defends companies against the legal risks of AI deployment. Lawsuits are already moving. The most prominent? A federal case against UnitedHealthcare, accusing the company of using AI to deny long-term care without sufficient human oversight. And that’s only the beginning. The playbook is already forming.

Here are the claims AI developers are now defending against:
• Product liability for algorithmic defects.
• Failure to warn about tool misuse.
• Discrimination based on automated decisions.
• Negligence for not keeping a “human in the loop.”

In America, you don’t have to prove intent. Just tie the harm to an AI tool and let a jury decide. Today, every AI developer is one bad headline away from a class action lawsuit. Let’s be clear: Our legal system is the envy of the world. But when lawsuits are filed before laws are even written, we aren’t protecting consumers, we’re punishing innovators for playing on a field without any lines drawn. Let me be crystal clear: We do not want China’s system. We don’t want central planning. We don’t want censorship. And we don’t want a government-controlled tech industry. But it would be naive to pretend China faces the same friction.

Yes, they have courts. But they don’t have:
• Billboards from class action lawyers.
• Contingency-fee lawsuits built around algorithmic outcomes.
• Juries “sending a message” to tech companies with punitive damages.
• Their developers don’t plan around litigation. Ours have to.

While companies like Nvidia plead to sell advanced chips to China after the H20 export ban was lifted, Beijing isn’t waiting around. It’s racing ahead, deploying AI in defense, logistics, and manufacturing without lawsuits, regulators, or legal second-guessing. We don’t envy China. But we must acknowledge that its AI teams aren’t operating with a target on their back. We’ve been here before. In 1996, Congress passed Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, shielding internet platforms from liability for user-generated content. That one provision allowed Amazon, YouTube, and countless others to thrive. We need an AI-specific shield now, a legal safe harbor that ensures developers aren’t liable for what users do with their tools, unless there’s fraud or criminal intent. Without it, legal departments will keep killing products before they launch.

Congress must also revisit a national moratorium on conflicting state AI laws. National consistency doesn’t mean more bureaucracy. It means sane, scalable innovation. This is our Apollo 13 moment. We have the best technology. We have the best talent. We have an entrepreneurial fire. But we’re losing altitude because the systems designed to protect us are choking progress. Let’s not become the bureaucracy we escaped to get to the moon. Let’s be the country that answered Apollo 13’s “Houston, we have a problem” and brought our tax-conscious astronauts safely back home. Let’s fix this the American way with clear rules, real urgency, and freedom that actually works.

Read more …

If you let a machine do all your thinking, you will lose the ability.

• Artificial Intelligence Breeds Mindless Inhumanity (RCW)

I began studying AI in the mid-1980s. Unusually for a computer scientist of that era, my interest was entirely in information, not in machines. I became obsessed with understanding what it meant to live during the transition from the late Industrial Age to the early Information Age. What I learned is that computers fundamentally alter the economics of information. We now have inexpensive access to more information, and to higher quality information, than ever before. In theory, that should help individuals reach better decisions, organizations devise improved strategies, and governments craft superior policies. But that’s just a theory. Does it? The answer is “sometimes.” Unfortunately, the “sometimes not” part of the equation is now poised to unleash devastating consequences.

Consider the altered economics of information: Scarcity creates value. That’s been true in all times, in all cultures, and for all resources. If there’s not enough of a resource to meet demand, its value increases. If demand is met and a surplus remains, value plummets. Historically, information was scarce. Spies, lawyers, doctors, priests, scientists, scholars, accountants, teachers, and others spent years acquiring knowledge, then commanded a premium for their services. Today, information is overabundant. No one need know anything because the trusty phones that never leave our sides can answer any question that might come our way. Why waste your time learning, studying, or internalizing information when you can just look it up on demand?

Having spent the past couple of years working in higher education reform and in conversation with college students, I’ve come to appreciate the power—and the danger—of this question. Today’s students have weaker general backgrounds than we’ve seen for many generations because when information ceased being scarce, it lost all value. It’s important to recall how recently this phenomenon began. In 2011, an estimated one-third of Americans, and one-quarter of American teenagers, had smartphones. From there, adoption among the young grew faster than among the general population. Current estimates are that over 90 percent of Americans, and over 95 percent of teenagers, have smartphone access. Even rules limiting classroom use cannot overcome the cultural shift.

Few of today’s college students or recent grads have ever operated without the ability to scout ahead or query a device for information on an as-needed basis. There’s thus no reason for them to have ever developed the discipline or the practices that form the basis for learning. The deeper problem, however, is that while instant lookup may work well for facts, it’s deadly for comprehension and worse for moral thinking. A quick lookup can list every battle of WWII, along with casualty statistics and outcome. It cannot reveal the strategic or ethical deliberations driving the belligerents as they entered that battle. Nor can it explain why Churchill fought for the side of good while Hitler fought for the side of evil—a question that our most popular interviewers and podcasters have recently brought to prominence.

At least, lookup couldn’t provide such answers until recently. New AI systems—still less than three years old—are rushing to fill that gap. They already offer explanations and projections, at times including the motives underlying given decisions. They are beginning to push into moral judgments. Of course, like all search and pattern-matching tools, these systems can only extrapolate from what they find. They thus tend to magnify whatever is popular. They’re also easy prey for some of the most basic cognitive biases. They tend to overweight the recent, the easily available, the widely repeated, and anything that confirms pre-conceived models. The recent reports of Grok regurgitating crude antisemitic stereotypes and slogans illustrate the technological half of the problem.

The shocking wave of terror-supporting actions wracking college campuses and drawing recent grads in many of our cities illustrate the human half. The abundance of information has destroyed its value. Because information—facts and data—are the building blocks upon which all understanding must rest, we’ve raised a generation incapable of deep understanding. Because complex moral judgments build upon comprehension, young Americans are also shorn of basic morality We are rapidly entering a world in which widespread access to voluminous information is producing worse—not better—decisions and actions at all levels. We have outsourced knowledge, comprehension, and judgment to sterile devices easily biased to magnify popular opinion. We have bred a generation of exquisitely credentialed, deeply immoral, anti-intellectuals on the brink of entering leadership.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/Kimberl59898021/status/1946007846857871636

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1945944408462893332
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1946104683568705589

https://twitter.com/itsme_urstruly/status/1945935561019281734

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 Older Entries