Francisco Collantes The Vision of Ezekiel 1630
How on earth can the polls be so close if most people Lemon talks to don’t know who Kamala is? I’m not buying it. It takes time to build name and face recognition. But Kamala just spent her first 40 days hiding from the press. Those polls are lying.
Lemon
WATCH: MSNBC's Jen Psaki was visibly upset after Don Lemon revealed to her that most of the voters he spoke to didn't even know who Kamala Harris was and that many black voters are flocking to Trump
"For the most part in Pittsburgh, or the Jersey Shore, in Ohio, many people did… pic.twitter.com/d7J8S27p9S
— George (@BehizyTweets) August 27, 2024
RFK
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828219047407706539
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828245686845927504
This is an incredible piece of tape.
1. RFK Jr. says he would say yes if asked to run the CIA, but…
2. The Senate would never confirm him because the CIA is protected by powerful committees that are “read in.”
3. He says he’d be “very very dangerous to these committees.”
4.… pic.twitter.com/olaCjzjYmD— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) August 27, 2024
RFK Jr. tells Tucker how difficult it was for him to ultimately endorse President Trump before revealing that the Democrat Party has been hiring private detectives to surveil him and everyone he’s ever known for 70 years to dig up dirt on him and discredit his candidacy. pic.twitter.com/KtEXJnYJs2
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) August 27, 2024
NEW: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says he is being forced to cough up $10 million because the Democratic Party is suing him to keep him off of ballots.
This is the same party that prides itself on being the "pro-democracy" party.
"They're suing me now in a dozen states. I've been in… pic.twitter.com/z2iQdIlOrt
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 26, 2024
When Bobby Kennedy endorsed Donald Trump last week, he burned his boats. There’s no turning back for him, or for American politics. Here’s his first interview since that happened.
(0:42) RFK Jr. Endorsing Donald Trump
(11:26) Censorship and Pavel Durov’s Arrest
(34:56) America’s… pic.twitter.com/AOQULEvZeX— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) August 26, 2024
Trump Dr. Phil
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828599617216209031
Tulsi
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828382219125301584
Biolabs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828150312265547911
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828268100040700374
“..the arrest warrant was issued by France’s OFMIN, the agency tasked with combating violence against minors..”
But
“..the investigation of his case has been entrusted to the National Anti-Fraud Unit..”
What links violence against minors to fraud?
• Durov May Be Banned From Leaving France If Charged (Sp.)
Telegram founder Pavel Durov, who was detained in France, may be banned from leaving the country if charged, the Financial Times newspaper reported, citing an informed Paris-based lawyer. Investigators may try to obtain additional information from Durov for the investigation or put pressure on him by extending his detention, the report said on Tuesday. If Durov is charged “it will be interesting to see what measures a judge imposes, as he lives abroad,” the lawyer was quoted as saying by the newspaper, adding that house arrest or a ban on leaving the country could be imposed. Durov may be in custody at the National Anti-Fraud Unit in the suburbs of Paris, a source told RIA Novosti.
“Considering that the investigation of his case has been entrusted to the National Anti-Fraud Unit, Durov may be there,” the source said. Russian-born Durov, who is a citizen of multiple countries, including France, was detained at an airport north of Paris on Saturday on charges linked to criminal uses of his Telegram app, including terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and fraud.
Macron detests not having hi tech industry in France.
• Macron Invited Durov in 2018 to Move Telegram Headquarters to Paris (Sp.)
French President Emmanuel Macron invited Telegram founder Pavel Durov to move the app’s headquarters from Dubai to Paris in 2018, but he declined, US media reported on Wednesday, citing people familiar with the matter. Macron made the proposal during a lunch, which had not been previously reported, the people said. The French leader also discussed granting French citizenship to Durov at the time, the newspaper reported. Russian-born Durov, who holds citizenship in several countries including France, was detained at a Paris airport on Saturday on charges related to the criminal use of his Telegram app, including terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering and fraud, which could land the 39-year-old billionaire in prison for up to 20 years. Macron has said that Durov’s arrest was not a political decision and promised that the decision on the businessman’s case will be made by judges.
“..enormously gifted, focused, eloquent, engagingly modest, and above all supremely principled..”
• Pavel Durov: The Quixotic Free Speech Hero of Our Time (Karganovic)
It seems that over two hundred years after the Revolution, in France the Liberté part of its celebrated slogan has not really stuck. On Saturday 24 August, Russian social media platform entrepreneur Pavel Durov was arrested by the French police at La Bourget airport near Paris on trumped-up charges. The French authorities went about it in a sneaky third-world manner that does them no honour. They waited for Durov’s plane to enter French air space before issuing the arrest warrant. In it Durov was charged with a slew of “ham sandwich” offences, including such absurdities as “promotion of terrorism, paedophilia, fraud, drug trafficking, organised crime, and cyberbullying”. As soon as Durov departed the plane, he was surrounded and led off by police agents. The actual reasons for this arrest have nothing to do with the allegation in the charge sheet and they are bound to resonate with partisans of freedom everywhere.
Firstly, it is Durov’s resolute and principled refusal to share on demand with security agencies information that would compromise the privacy of Telegram users. Durov’s firm position in this regard collided directly with legislation which obligates social platforms operating on European Union territory to do precisely that. Secondly, the same legislation requires social media platforms to institute a humiliating system of what euphemistically is called “monitoring.” This amounts to directed censorship of opinions expressed by users in their Telegram posts. Durov wanted none of it. But in the EU, platform management is under orders to engage in this odious practice on behalf of and according to the directives of the totalitarian EU political elite. The firm rejection by Durov of that invasive demand, as we just saw, had dire consequences for his personal liberty.
All collective West based social platforms have willingly succumbed to these unethical demands and have more or less meekly agreed to act as extensions for their countries’ security services, to the detriment of users’ privacy. Attentive readers will easily connect the dots and recall that far from being an isolated occurrence this arrest follows a pattern of repression targeting non-systemic public figures in all major collective West “democracies.” Tucker Carlson a few months ago performed a huge public service by broadcasting an immensely informative interview with the thirty nine year-old Russian Wunderkind, recorded at Durov’s office in the United Arab Emirates.
The fascinating interview unveils the portrait of an enormously gifted, focused, eloquent, engagingly modest, and above all supremely principled person. Durov and his equally accomplished brother were the driving force behind VK, the Russian version of Facebook characterised by a much greater degree of sophistication, and later on of the Telegram social media platform which, at last count, had a global following of over nine hundred million users. But the key takeaway that emerged from Tucker Carlson’s interview, and it was with providential timing to counteract the deluge of media calumnies that is sure to follow Durov’s arrest, is something entirely different. It is the glaring contrast between the Russian genius, unmoved by the temptations of wealth and fame, and the avarice, vanity and emptiness of his Western counterparts who have been trying to compete with him in the same line of work.
With all that being said, like many members of the Russian intelligentsia, from A. Herzen in the 19th century on to the present day, Pavel Durov fell pray to his compatriots’ standard infantile misperception of where the grass is greener. At an earlier stage of his career he sadly failed to strike a reasonable balance between his passionate and laudable commitment to freedom and privacy and the conscientious fulfilment of his patriotic duties which, in their broad sweep, override fidelity to narrower principles, no matter how fundamental in their significance. Had he acted more flexibly then, and in the interview with Tucker Carlson the circumstances of that episode are fully revealed, he would not have turned into a stateless global nomad and most likely would not have fallen into the trap so treacherously sprung on him in Paris.
The legal situation arising from the detention of Pavel Durov, with the preposterous charges concocted against him and the harrowing possibility of twenty years’ imprisonment, is tailor made for maître Jacques Vergès but, unfortunately, he is no longer with us. One hopes that Durov will secure competent and uncorrupted representation and that his legal counsel shall grasp the self-evident fact that the case against him in its entirety is political, with criminal elements maliciously contrived and grafted on for propaganda effect.
The Assange case now having been settled, Pavel Durov is certain to become the new global privacy and freedom of expression icon. Freedom loving people world-wide will mobilise to show support in order to extract him from the clutches of the pathetic Macron regime and its overseas “partners” who, from the background, are undoubtedly pulling the strings. That is well and good. But one simply wishes that once and for all liberty would triumph. Icons are uplifting, but we could easily do with one fewer if that were the price that we should have to pay in order to secure the freedom to which Pavel so admirably dedicated his passionate idealism and irrepressible creativity.
“Durov though got drunk on NATOstan’s “freedom and democracy” propaganda, rebuffed Russia, and left.”
“There’s one thing that Putin never tolerates: betrayal of Russia. And that applies to the letter to Durov.”
NOTE: he was free to leave.
• EU to Telegram – We’re Coming to Get You (Pepe Escobar)
The Pavel Durov saga is a gift that will keep on giving for a long time to come. This is what hot information war is all about. So let’s attempt to connect several loose ends. A high-level Russian analyst makes the case that Durov’s arrest is connected with “anti-French protests in its former colonies, withdrawal from its traditional ‘sphere of influence’ where Telegram infrastructure was used to push anti-colonial and anti-Macronist narratives”. Add to it an “attempt to influence narratives on Ukraine both in Russian and the international media field, which is highly dependent on Telegram infrastructure.” Paris is indeed desperate to make itself relevant when it comes to psy ops and influencing/special warfare in Ukraine. However, as the analyst notes, the French don’t have the tech means to accomplish it.
So this may have led to Macron deciding to “exercise a personal pressure campaign against Durov himself. French authorities must be rather desperate in trying to keep their heads in the game of global politics. And Telegram today is global politics.” Paris was just waiting for a big break. When the pilot of Durov’s Embraer private jet submitted his flight plan, there was no warrant for his arrest in France. Only when the jet was on its way to Le Bourget, Paris filed the warrant in haste. Durov was clueless all along. In a nutshell: Paris got a fateful heads up he was flying into France – could have been via Durov’s Dubai-based, post-obsessive, social climbing girlfriend – and laid out the trap in a flash. There’s a myth that the FSB in the past asked Durov for Telegram’s encryption keys. False. The FSB wanted Telegram to provide top access on investigations of serious crimes, on a case-by-case basis.
That’s an enormous difference compared to what the US Government does with Meta or Twitter/X via their totally open backdoors. Durov though got drunk on NATOstan’s “freedom and democracy” propaganda, rebuffed Russia, and left. And that brings us to President Putin. Putin had better things to do than to meet Durov in Baku, and the Kremlin has gone on the record to deny the meeting. Durov was doing a tour of Central Asia and the Caucasus, they happened to cross their paths in Azerbaijan. There’s one thing that Putin never tolerates: betrayal of Russia. And that applies to the letter to Durov. When Durov went to the US, the Americans, predictably, demanded Telegram’s backdoors to surveil everybody. So he set up shop in Dubai and later applied for French citizenship.
“The Paris Public Prosecutor’s Office has stated that he was arrested as part of a broad criminal inquiry against an unnamed person.”
• Musk Asks Macron To Explain Durov Arrest (RT)
US tech mogul Elon Musk has asked French President Emmanuel Macron to shed light on the reasons behind the arrest of Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov. The Russian entrepreneur was detained last week upon arriving at Paris-Le Bourget Airport. The French judicial authorities have twice extended Durov’s detention. The Paris Public Prosecutor’s Office has stated that he was arrested as part of a broad criminal inquiry against an unnamed person. “It would be helpful to the global public to understand more details about why he was arrested,” Musk wrote in a comment under Macron’s post on X (formerly Twitter). On Sunday, the French leader took to X to deny having any political motive for detaining Durov. He insisted that the arrest is part of “an ongoing judicial investigation” in which the courts will decide the entrepreneur’s fate.
Durov has said he has faced pressure from the US. In an interview with American journalist Tucker Carlson in April, he claimed that he received “too much attention” from the FBI and other law enforcement agencies while on US soil. According to the prosecutors, Durov could face charges ranging from complicity in drug dealing and money laundering, to facilitating the distribution of child pornography. French media had previously reported that the arrest of the 39-year-old Russian citizen, who also holds French, UAE, and St. Kitts and Nevis citizenship, was related to alleged offenses regarding Telegram. Reports suggest that the authorities believe Durov is complicit in a range of crimes allegedly committed via the social media app due to insufficient moderation.
Born in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) in 1984, Durov left Russia in the mid-2010s and has since mainly lived in the UAE. In 2021, he was granted French citizenship. In July, Durov wrote on his Telegram channel that the number of active monthly users of the messaging platform had grown to 950 million. Durov’s arrest has been denounced as an infringement upon rights enjoyed in both the EU and the US. Carlson, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic, former CIA and NSA contractor Edward Snowden, and Silicon Valley investor David Sacks have spoken out in support of the entrepreneur. Shortly after the arrest, Musk, who launched the hashtag #FreePavel, suggested that the pressure on freedom of speech could worsen.
“We’ve lost Europe,” Kennedy replied. “Europe now does not have free speech.”
• Durov’s Arrest Is ‘Hallmark Of Dictatorship’ – Tucker Carlson to RFK Jr (RT)
Telegram CEO Pavel Durov’s arrest in France, along with the US administration’s encouragement of it, bear “the hallmark of dictatorship,” American journalist Tucker Carlson has said. The comments were made during an interview with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has recently announced the suspension of his campaign as an independent candidate for US president. Durov was arrested in Paris last week, and is being held for questioning in connection to a broader cybercrime probe into illicit activities on the billionaire’s end-to-end encrypted social media platform, the French authorities have said. Telegram generally refuses to share user data and chat logs with law enforcement, and Durov has claimed that this privacy-first approach has drawn attention from intelligence agencies around the world.
In the interview on Monday, Kennedy said the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which protects the right to freedom of expression from government interference, should also protect “misinformation,” as well as information that “no one wants to hear.” Carlson replied that the administration of US President Joe Biden currently views anything that criticizes the “job that they’re doing” as misinformation. “With that in mind, you see the Biden administration encouraging France, [French President Emmanuel] Macron to arrest the owner and founder of Telegram, Pavel Durov, who is, as of now, in a French prison,” Carlson said, adding: “that’s the hallmark of dictatorship.” “We’ve lost Europe,” Kennedy replied. “Europe now does not have free speech.”
He went on to draw a comparison between Durov and X (formerly Twitter) owner Elon Musk, blasting the Democratic Party for its lack of actual democratic values. “Elon Musk should be the hero of the Democratic Party,” Kennedy said. “He was actually the only one that would allow free speech on his platform, and he’s now become a villain because of it.” Russia’s top human rights official, Tatyana Moskalkova, said Durov’s arrest is a blow against free speech, claiming it is “an attempt to shut down Telegram, the platform where you can find the truth about world affairs.” Telegram’s official statement on the arrest of its CEO noted that the platform complies with EU laws, and that its content-moderation policies are in line with industry standards.
“..while Musk himself shuts down Egyptian comedian Bassem Youseff who had 10m followers on X..”
• Durov’s Arrest Represents A New Level Of Desperation From Western Elites (Jay)
The arrest of Pavel Durov marks a new low point on the scumline of the side of the bath – the tub being western democracies and the line being their desperation to stay in power at the costs of controlling social media. Durov, who owns Telegram and lives in Dubai, could be in jail for months and possibly years on the trumped-up charges which the French state has conjured up simply because he refuses to allow any government to have a back door into Telegram. He has fought this tooth and nail for years with the west, in particular the U.S., playing every dirty trick in the book to get access to the platform for its own nefarious purposes – to destroy opposition figures, their strategies etc. – rather than what it is dressed up to be, identifying terrorists and international criminals.
As the UK ponders how its own state has sunk to a new totalitarian level in recent days with the arrest of its citizens who merely like a posting on a social media platform, the West has arrested this French Russian dual national genius who is charged with the crimes of those criminals active on Telegram. And so charges of terrorism and trafficking in minors, drugs and whatever else they can find on the platform will be made against him as someone abetting in the crimes. Of course, the same rules will not be levelled against Elon Musk who surely has criminals on his platform or for that matter any of the other social media platforms.
But how many of these platforms are also taking the same stand as Durov? We are led to believe that most of them aren’t but in light of his arrest we should assume that many of them have already allowed some sort of access to them for the deep state. Elon Musk likes to brag about his refusal to comply with the EU’s demands that he “moderates” who he allows onto X, adding that other social media platforms accepted the deal offered to him by Brussels: comply with our requests and we grant you some leniency on future antitrust fines. This offer, which he claims was happily accepted by other platforms is a close as you can get to the EU offering a brown envelope stuffed full of cash to a man in a pub. It’s a bribe and gives a clue as to how anti-democratic the EU is and how it operates in the shadows.
The French arrest however goes deeper in that we can assume that it was not France operating alone to nab Durov. We can assume that the FBI and CIA had probably pushed Macron to do this appalling dirty work but perhaps also Israel had a hand in it. Just recently, Netanyahu complained that data which was stolen from the government was being exchanged on Telegram and asked Durov to step in and retrieve it. He got not reply. Did Mossad have a hand in the arrest of Telegram’s boss? It seems credible given that it is hard to believe the Durov would fly into French airspace eyes wide open. Was it a kidnapping operation to get his plane and his pilot to land in Paris? French TV channel TF1 said Dubai-based Durov had been travelling from Azerbaijan and was arrested at around 8 p.m. (1800 GMT) on Saturday 24th of August but did not state whether the plane’s ultimate destination had been France.
The details around the arrest are very sketchy, but according to Reuters, Durov, whose fortune was estimated by Forbes at $15.5 billion, said some governments had sought to pressure him but the app should remain a “neutral platform” and not a “player in geopolitics”. Another question which arises from the arrest is whether it is an international effort by western countries led by the U.S. – with Israel very much part of it – to test the waters for other arrests. Pundits have been dismissed as conspiracy theorists for weeks now suggesting Elon Musk will be arrested at some point, or charged in his absence, by UK authorities for some of the more controversial posts he has made about the political situation in the UK, or even by the EU which appears to have started a legal battle with him after he refused to respond to two letters sent to him by a French European Commissioner.
Perhaps even the Democrats in the U.S. might play the same card given that Musk has lost all credibility as this neutral player in U.S. politics after he has so openly supported Trump who has promised him a position in a new government if he were to enter the Oval Office. There is no such thing really as free speech. It comes at a very high price for those who want to protect and cherish it and now France will test the political landscape to see how the arrest of Durov will affect Macron’s ratings. The French president has made outstandingly poor judgment in the past in calling for parliamentary elections immediately after EU ones which gave so much power to far-right groups, so he seems to be good at falling on his own sword. He may well have factored that Durov does not have the popularity of say Assange who didn’t stir so much political anger when he was banged up for years in a filthy, dank cell in the UK on trumped up charges from the U.S.
What is especially worrying is that locking up powerful people who have huge followings on the internet is becoming a trend which people are getting used to. The war between those who want to control the perceived truth and those who hold the actual one is hotting up. Scott Ritter, Andrew Tate, Richard Medhurst all arrested within days of one another, while Musk himself shuts down Egyptian comedian Bassem Youseff who had 10m followers on X. What we are witnessing is a new level of desperation that western elites are more afraid than ever that after wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in Ukraine and starting a world war in the Middle East that voters have no confidence any more in their decision-making, as they, the public, struggle more and more to pay for groceries or even heat their houses. It’s a new milestone in the blind dogma of elites to resort to tactics which we would have scorned China or North Korea for using just a few years ago. It’s a new level of panic which we haven’t seen before.
“..neither side will be given the questions in advance,” he continued, adding “no Donna Brazile!”
• Harris Agrees To Debate Rules – Trump (RT)
Former US President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have agreed to a set of rules for their upcoming presidential debate, Trump announced on Tuesday. Harris allegedly wanted to use a “cheat sheet” during the ABC-hosted showdown, but was apparently denied. The debate will take place on September 10 in Philadelphia, and will be hosted by ABC News anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. “The rules will be the same as the last CNN debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden” Trump wrote in a post to his Truth Social platform. “The debate will be ‘stand up’, and candidates cannot bring notes, or ‘cheat sheets’. We have also been given assurance by ABC that this will be a ‘fair and equitable’ debate, and that neither side will be given the questions in advance,” he continued, adding “no Donna Brazile!”
Before the 2016 presidential election, CNN contributor and Democratic National Committee (DNC) vice-chair Donna Brazile gave Hillary Clinton a list of questions ahead of her town hall event with the network. Trump has long maintained that CNN and other mainstream media outlets openly favor Democrats. However, he praised the objectivity of CNN hosts Jake Tapper and Dana Bash after they moderated a debate between him and President Joe Biden in June. The debate was an unmitigated disaster for Biden, who appeared frail and confused throughout, and ended his reelection campaign three weeks later.
Trump pulled out of the September 10 debate after Biden withdrew from the race, calling on Harris to face him in a September 4 head-to-head on Fox News instead. However, Harris insisted on September 10, and Trump agreed, before calling on the vice president to accept a total of three debates, including the Fox News date and a third showdown hosted by NBC News. Harris has only agreed to the ABC News debate. The Trump and Harris campaigns argued this week over rules and technical details governing the debate, with Trump’s team pushing for each candidate’s microphone to be muted while the other speaks, and Harris’ staff lobbying for open mics.
Harris “is ready to deal with Trump’s constant lies and interruptions in real time. Trump should stop hiding behind the mute button,” a spokesman for the vice president said on Monday. Trump campaign spokesman Jason Miller replied that the Republican candidate had “accepted the ABC debate under the exact same terms as the CNN debate,” before claiming that Harris asked for “a seated debate, with notes, and opening statements.” Before announcing that he had reached an agreement with Harris’ team, Trump said on Sunday that he was considering backing out of the debate entirely due to ABC’s “ridiculous and biased” coverage of him. “Why would I do the Debate against Kamala Harris on that network?” he wrote on Truth Social, adding that ABC’s journalists “have a lot to answer for.”
O’Leary
NEW: Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary rips Kamala Harris for being afraid to talk to the press, tells her to "come out come out wherever you are."
"There is no scenario where the president of the United States can't head up a press conference."
"If I'm a swing voter, I'm thinking to… pic.twitter.com/Cb7wh6c5LP
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 27, 2024
That’s one whopper of a flip flop.
• Trump Slams Harris ‘Flip Flop’ On Border Wall (ZH)
After presiding over the worst illegal immigration crisis in US history, failed ‘border czar’ Kamala Harris has now pledged to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a wall at the southern US border – a plan she called “un-American” during the Trump administration. According to Axios, which calls it the “latest example of Harris flip-flopping on her past liberal positions,” Harris is now embracing a ‘more hawkish’ immigration policy while the Trump campaign spends tens of millions of dollars on attack ads over the Biden-Harris administration’s failed border policies. Last week, Harris told the Democratic National Convention that she would sign a recent bipartisan border security bill negotiated by Sens. James Lankford (R-OK) and Chris Murphy (D-CT), which calls for hundreds of millions of dollars of unspent funds to be used to continue Trump’s wall.
“It requires the Trump border wall,” Lankford told Axios. “It is in the bill itself that it sets the standards that were set during the Trump administration: Here’s where it will be built. Here’s how it has to be built, the height, the type, everything during the Trump construction.” In 2017, then-Senator Harris called Trump’s border wall project a “stupid use of money,” and committed to blocking funding for it. Then, under her watch as the so-called “Border Czar,” illegal crossings on the southern border spiked (at least) 140% compared to numbers seen during the Trump administration, according to the House Committee on Homeland Security.
After Democrats gained control of the House in 2019, they opposed the large-scale funding Trump requested for the wall – leading to a government shutdown. Eventually, some funding was approved – but was far less than what Trump had requested. In response, Trump declared a national emergency in February 2019 to divert funds from other federal projects to the wall’s construction, which led to various legal challenges. Last week Harris came under fire for a campaign video which prominently featured images of Trump’s partially built US-Mexico border wall, boasting that her credentials as a “border-state prosecutor” would allow her to get the job done.
Update (1153ET): The Trump campaign has responded to Axios reporting that Kamala Harris now supports a border wall. “How much longer will the mainstream media allow Kamala Harris to hide and use staff to speak on her behalf? It’s DAY 37 of ZERO interviews and Kamala’s anonymous campaign sources are now claiming she supports President Trump’s border wall – this is a preposterous and false claim.” “Kamala’s ACTIONS speak much louder than the WORDS of the anonymous staff she is cowering behind.”
Trump doesn’t need saving. The polls are lying.
• Will Kennedy Save Trump? (Bridge)
Donald Trump’s presidential campaign got the boost it desperately needed when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. joined forces with the former president in an effort to ensure the defeat of Kamala Harris. It was undoubtedly a painful sight for millions of diehard Democrats to behold: On Friday, the estranged Democrat Robert F. Kennedy Jr. shared the stage with former President Donald Trump at a sprawling rally in Arizona, hours after he’d suspended his independent presidential campaign and announced that he was endorsing the rabble-rousing Republican. The 70-year-old independent, showing that he has not completely lost his presidential ambitions, emphasized that he is suspending his campaign — “not ending it.” “I am not terminating my campaign, I am simply suspending it and not ending it. My name will remain on the ballot in most states,” he said.
Importantly for Trump in his grueling showdown with Kamala Harris, Kennedy said he would drop his name from the ballot in 10 battleground states where his presence could have stolen electoral college votes from the former president. Will the entrance of Kennedy into the equation make a profound difference for the Trump campaign come November? It’s difficult to say. When the campaign was down to a contest between two elderly white men, many voters seemed happy to consider a third voice, as reflected in Kennedy’s relatively high poll numbers earlier in the year. However, once Joe Biden was sent back to the basement and Kamala Harris was catapulted to the political forefront amid heavily scripted, media-generated enthusiasm (the same media, by the way, which Harris stubbornly refuses to talk to), Kennedy’s popularity began to wane.
While Kennedy’s performance in the polls has been steadily declining – a recent CBS News poll measured his support at just 2% – even this limited number could spell the difference between victory and defeat in a race that promises to be razor-close. However, with regard to the critical swing states, the picture improves dramatically for Kennedy. A recent New York Times/Siena College poll showed him with 6% support in Arizona and Nevada and 5% in Michigan, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. And let’s not forget that Arizona and Georgia were decided by fewer than 12,000 votes each in 2020. Wisconsin has been decided by fewer than 23,000 votes in the last two presidential elections.
So now the question for the Republicans is: how best to utilize a scion from one of the most famous political dynasties of modern American history? How about as the future CIA Director or District Attorney? Trump tossed out juicy bait to the conspiracy theorists when he said Kennedy could be granted access to “all of the remaining documents pertaining to the assassination of John F. Kennedy,” as part of a proposed executive commission on presidential assassination attempts, including the one that nearly killed him last month in Butler, Pennsylvania. RFK Jr. has made it clear that he believes that the CIA and associated actors of the ‘deep state’ were directly involved in the assassination of his uncle, former President John F. Kennedy. A recent poll by Gallup showed that over 60 percent of Americans believe that JFK was killed as the result of a well-planned government conspiracy. The CIA has repeatedly denied that it had any involvement in the murder.
Another Kennedy talking point that could help herd voters into the Republican camp is his extreme skepticism of Covid vaccines, mask mandates, lockdowns and the individuals who pushed these controversial measures on the public in the first place, namely Anthony Fauci and company. Trump teaming up with the anti-vaxxer Kennedy seems to fly in the face of conventional wisdom. After all, it was Donald J. Trump who was initially responsible for delivering – right or wrong, the jury is still out on the matter – the Covid-19 vaccine to an unsuspecting public through “Operation Warp Speed.” However, Trump’s unbridled enthusiasm for the Covid vaccine failed to trickle down to his army of conservative constituents, who are intrinsically wary of any government overreach in their lives. In other words, Trump drastically misread his base, which is loaded with vaccine skeptics.
On one memorable occasion at the height of the Covid pandemic, Republicans admonished Trump during a rally with rare boos and heckling when he encouraged members of the audience to get their shots. So here is another area – government enforced medical interventions – where Kennedy’s presence on Team Trump could lend some much-needed balance to the worn-out narrative, although it does have the potential to attract more “weird” accusations from the left.At the same time, Kennedy, much like Trump, has spoken out fiercely against the “media organs” that have severely throttled his message on the campaign trail, while engineering the rise of Kamala Harris based upon “nothing.” “No policies, no interviews, no debates, only smoke and mirrors and balloons in a highly produced Chicago circus.”
This is a concern that will resonate with those voters who remember how intensely unpopular Harris was before pulling out of the 2020 presidential race with her opinion poll numbers in the lower single digits. And here is the crux of the matter: do they remember Harris’ intense unlikability and lack of presidential qualities, or has the media successfully brainwashed the entire Democratic camp into believing that the vice president is the ‘second coming of Abraham Lincoln,’ as JD Vance feared? While we may never know to what degree RFK Jr. will influence the outcome of the election, it seems undeniable that he will attract many disaffected voters from across the political spectrum who now understand what a controlled and pathetic sham the entire US political process has become, largely due to overwhelming leftist control of the media machinery. That may give Donald Trump just enough of a grudge vote to enter the White House a second time.
Exercise in futility. If Trump wins the election, he’ll throw out these lawfare cases. If he loses, they’ve beaten him, no more need for lawfare.
• Jack Smith Files Revised Indictment in Trump Federal Election Case (ET)
Special counsel Jack Smith filed an updated indictment against former President Donald Trump in Washington on Aug. 27 following the Supreme Court’s ruling that he enjoyed some presidential immunity from criminal prosecution. “Today, a federal grand jury in the District of Columbia returned a superseding indictment, charging the defendant with the same criminal offenses that were charged in the original indictment,” an Aug. 27 filing from the special counsel’s office reads. “The superseding indictment, which was presented to a new grand jury that had not previously heard evidence in this case, reflects the government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions in Trump v. United States.” The new indictment narrows the allegations against the former president by removing allegations involving his interactions with the Justice Department.
It no longer lists as a co-conspirator former DOJ official Jeffrey Clark. Trump’s co-conspirators were not named in either indictment, but they have been identified through public records and other means. Smith’s superseding indictment still contains four charges against the former president, including those from the financial reform law the Supreme Court addressed in Fischer v. United States. In Trump v. United States, a majority of the Supreme Court held that presidents enjoyed several tiers of immunity from prosecution: absolute immunity for acts that fall within their “conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority,” a presumption of immunity for their official acts, and no immunity for unofficial acts. Chief Justice John Roberts’s majority opinion grouped the allegations into three categories: those surrounding Trump’s work with the Department of Justice (DOJ); those involving his communication with state electors and his communications on Jan. 6, 2021; and his urging Vice President Mike Pence to not certify the election results in the Senate.
Trump received absolute immunity from prosecution of the first category. For the second, the Court remanded the issue to the district court to determine whether his actions were official. His communications with Pence are “presumptively immune,” but the DOJ can rebut that presumption in court. It’s unclear how much of the superseding indictment will survive. D.C. Judge Tanya Chutkan will likely receive briefings from both the special counsel and former Trump’s legal team advocating their view of which charges should be dropped or maintained in the indictment. The Supreme Court has left her with the task of parsing former Trump’s actions and determining which were official and which were unofficial. Judge Chutkan has scheduled a status conference for Sept. 5.
Experts have told The Epoch Times that the prosecution will extend past the election. If Trump wins the presidency, he’s expected to withdraw the case. Even if he loses, however, the case could face additional appeal and potentially make its way back to the Supreme Court. Last year, Trump’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss on statutory grounds and alleging that the initial indictment failed to “state an offense.” More specifically, it alleged the indictment failed to allege the type of deceit or trickery needed for the first count, which focused in both indictments on an alleged conspiracy to defraud the United States. On Aug. 3, Judge Chutkan denied the motion without prejudice and stated that Trump “may file a renewed motion once all issues of immunity have been resolved.”
The superseding indictment came just a day after Smith asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to affirm the legitimacy of his office. Florida Judge Aileen Cannon had dismissed his classified documents case against Trump on the grounds that Smith’s appointment violated the constitution. That case too could reach the Supreme Court where at least one justice — Justice Clarence Thomas — expressed concern about Smith’s office. That came in his concurrence for Trump v. United States. None of the other justices joined that opinion, but Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed concern about the special counsel’s power during oral argument on April 25. Cannon limited her decision to the documents case, although it raised questions about the legitimacy of his other prosecutions.
“The Georgia appeals court will hear an appeal by Trump and several co-defendants on Dec. 5..”
• Trump Lawyers Urge Appeals Court to Disqualify Fani Willis (ET)
Former President Donald Trump’s lawyers on Monday submitted a court filing against Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in the Georgia Court of Appeals, arguing that she should be removed from the case for committing a “severe violation” of the state’s legal guidelines. In a reply brief, the former president’s team wrote that Trump was “aggrieved by Willis’ church speech,” referring to comments she made in January that suggested there was a racial animus at play when a co-defendant filed a motion to have her disqualified over a relationship she had with her then-special prosecutor. The legal team said that her speech was “a severe violation of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct,” claiming that her comments at the church were allegedly designed to increase public condemnation of Trump and the other co-defendants in the eyes of potential jurors. On those grounds, according to the lawyers, Willis should be removed from the case.
“Pretermitting fairness, President Trump was injured by Willis’ … speech because national and local media outlets broadcast and reported Willis’ claim as an attack against the defense,” the filing said. Willis, it added, also asserted that “allegations against her stemmed from racism,” which his legal team said were unfounded. The Georgia appeals court will hear an appeal by Trump and several co-defendants on Dec. 5, it previously ruled, over whether Willis should be disqualified from the case due to her relationship with former special prosecutor Nathan Wade. Earlier this year, Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee ruled that either Wade or Willis must leave the case, prompting Wade to leave and allowing Willis to stay on board. Trump and the other defendants quickly sought to appeal the case.
In his March ruling, McAfee chided Willis for her church speech but said it is not grounds for her disqualification. He also said there wasn’t enough evidence to remove her based on the Wade relationship, although he signaled that an “odor of mendacity” was permeating the case. Fulton County prosecutors had said that her speech at the church was vague, and she was not speaking about anyone in particular. “Isn’t it them who’s playing the race card when they only question one?” Willis said during her speech, in part. “Isn’t it them playing the race card when they constantly think I need someone from some other jurisdiction in some other state to tell me how to do a job I’ve been doing almost 30 years?”
Her office filed a motion to dismiss the appeal in August, arguing there wasn’t enough evidence to back up their claims that she had a conflict of interest due to her prior relationship with Wade. “Unsatisfied, the Appellants now seize upon the trial court’s criticisms of the District Attorney to distort its actual findings and overstate their case,” the district attorney’s office wrote. “They ask this Court to second guess the trial court’s factual conclusions and apply standards of disqualification that no Georgia court has ever authorized or employed.” The conflict started in January when co-defendant Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign aide, alleged in court papers that the pair were in a relationship, a claim that the two later confirmed during a contentious hearing before McAfee in February.
However, they disputed key allegations made by lawyers for Roman and his co-defendants, including that they improperly benefitted financially from their arrangement. They also refuted claims made by a witness that their relationship started much earlier than they had said. The case was brought by Willis against Trump and more than a dozen other co-defendants, accusing them of conspiring to overturn the election results in the county after the 2020 election. In part, her office’s indictment focused on a Trump phone call in January 2021 with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in which the president asked him about votes and ballots. Trump and the majority of the other co-defendants, including former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, have pleaded not guilty, although several have entered guilty pleas as part of deals with the prosecution. Due to the appeals process, the case likely will not proceed to trial before the November election.
“Reading the runes of Bill Burns message says prepare for war with NATO.”
• The Western Way of War – Owning The Narrative Trumps Reality (Crooke)
War propaganda and feint are as old as the hills. Nothing new. But what is new is that infowar is no longer the adjunct to wider war objectives – but has become an end in and of itself. The West has come to view ‘owning’ the winning narrative – and presenting the Other’s as clunky, dissonant, and extremist – as being more important than facing facts-on-the ground. Owning the winning narrative is to win, in this view. Virtual ‘victory’ thus trumps ‘real’ reality. So, war becomes rather the setting for imposing ideological alignment across a wide global alliance and enforcing it via compliant media. This objective enjoys a higher priority than, say, ensuring a manufacturing capacity sufficient to sustain military objectives. Crafting an imagined ‘reality’ has taken precedence over shaping the ground reality. The point here is that this approach – being a function of whole of society alignment (both at home and abroad) – creates entrapments into false realities, false expectations, from which an exit (when such becomes necessary), turns near impossible, precisely because imposed alignment has ossified public sentiment.
The possibility for a State to change course as events unfold becomes curtailed or lost, and the accurate reading of facts on the ground veers toward the politically correct and away from reality. The cumulative effect of ‘a winning virtual narrative’ holds the risk nonetheless, of sliding incrementally toward inadvertent ‘real war’. Take, for example, the NATO-orchestrated and equipped incursion into the symbolically significant Kursk Oblast. In terms of a ‘winning narrative’, its appeal to the West is obvious: Ukraine ‘takes the war into Russia’. Had the Ukrainian forces succeeded in capturing the Kursk Nuclear Power Station, they then would have had a significant bargaining chip, and might well have syphoned away Russian forces from the steadily collapsing Ukrainian ‘Line’ in Donbas. And to top it off, (in infowar terms), the western media was prepped and aligned to show President Putin as “frozen” by the surprise incursion, and “wobbling” with anxiety that the Russian public would turn against him in their anger at the humiliation.
Bill Burns, head of CIA, opined that “Russia would offer no concessions on Ukraine, until Putin’s over-confidence was challenged, and Ukraine could show strength”. Other U.S. officials added that the Kursk incursion – in itself – would not bring Russia to the negotiating table; It would be necessary to build on the Kursk operation with other daring operations (to shake Moscow’s sang froid). Of course, the overall aim was to show Russia as fragile and vulnerable, in line with the narrative that, at any moment Russia, could crack apart and scatter to the wind, in fragments. Leaving the West as winner, of course. In fact, the Kursk incursion was a huge NATO gamble: It involved mortgaging Ukraine’s military reserves and armour, as chips on the roulette table, as a bet that an ephemeral success in Kursk would upend the strategic balance. The bet was lost, and the chips forfeit.
Plainly put, this Kursk affair exemplifies the West’s problem with ‘winning narratives’: Their inherent flaw is that they are grounded in emotivism and eschew argumentation. Inevitably, they are simplistic. They are simply intended to fuel a ‘whole of society’ common alignment. Which is to say that across MSM; business, federal agencies, NGOs and the security sector, all should adhere to opposing all ‘extremisms’ threatening ‘our democracy’. This aim, of itself, dictates that the narrative be undemanding and relatively uncontentious: ‘Our Democracy, Our Values and Our Consensus’. The Democratic National Convention, for example, embraces ‘Joy’ (repeated endlessly), ‘moving Forward’ and ‘opposing weirdness’ as key statements. They are banal, however, these memes are given their energy and momentum, not by content so much, as by the deliberate Hollywood setting lending them razzamatazz and glamour. It is not hard to see how this one-dimensional zeitgeist may have contributed to the U.S. and its allies’ misreading the impact of today’s Kursk ‘daring adventure’ on ordinary Russians.
‘Kursk’ has history. In 1943, Germany invaded Russia in Kursk to divert from its own losses, with Germany ultimately defeated at the Battle of Kursk. The return of German military equipment to the environs of Kursk must have left many gaping; the current battlefield around the town of Sudzha is precisely the spot where, in 1943, the Soviet 38th and 40th armies coiled for a counteroffensive against the German 4th Army. Over the centuries, Russia has been variously attacked on its vulnerable flank from the West. And more recently by Napoleon and Hitler. Unsurprisingly, Russians are acutely sensitive to this bloody history. Did Bill Burns et al think this through? Did they imagine that NATO invading Russia itself would make Putin feel ‘challenged’, and that with one further shove, he would fold, and agree to a ‘frozen’ outcome in Ukraine – with the latter entering NATO? Maybe they did. Ultimately the message that western services sent was that the West (NATO) is coming for Russia. This is the meaning of deliberately choosing Kursk. Reading the runes of Bill Burns message says prepare for war with NATO.
Macron lost the parliamentary election in July. But he’s still president.
• Macron Rejects Left-Wing Government (RT)
French President Emmanuel Macron has refused to accept the left-wing New Popular Front’s candidate for prime minister, saying it would be a threat to “institutional stability,” according to a communique released by the Elysee Palace on Monday. The parliamentary election in July gave the left-wing alliance more seats in the National Assembly than the competitors, but not enough to govern, forcing the president to conduct successive rounds of talks to appoint a new prime minister and form a new government. As president, Macron is responsible for confirming the new head of the government. However, he dismissed the idea of allowing the left-wing coalition to hold the office of prime minister, leaving the nation in a political deadlock.
“My responsibility is that the country is not blocked nor weakened,” Macron said in a statement, claiming that a left-wing government “would be immediately censored by all the other groups represented in the National Assembly” and “the institutional stability of our country therefore requires us not to choose this option.” The parliamentary election in July left 577 seats in the National Assembly divided between the left-wing New Popular Front (NFP) alliance with over 188 seats, followed by Macron’s centrist alliance at around 161, and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally at 142. The Republicans received 48 seats, while the remaining 38 were divided between minor parties.
Launched in June as a broad left-wing alliance, the NPF comprises France Unbowed (LFI), the Socialist Party, the Greens, the French Communist Party, and other political parties, composing the majority of the left wing in France. The alliance has put forward Lucie Castets, a 37-year-old economist and director of financial affairs at Paris City Hall, as its candidate for prime minister. After Macron’s announcement, Jean-Luc Melenchon, the LFI leader, accused the president of creating an “exceptionally serious situation.” Commenting on the move, the secretary-general of the Greens, Marine Tondelier, said the decision is “a disgrace” and “dangerous democratic irresponsibility,” adding that Macron is ignoring the election results. LFI also called for protests to urge Macron to “respect democracy,” and said it would present a motion of impeachment of the president.
A nation hell-bent on war.
• Poland In ‘State Of Hybrid War’ – Deputy Defense Chief (RT)
Poland has slipped into a state of “hybrid war” amid soaring tensions with Russia and its key ally Belarus, Polish Deputy Defense Minister Cezary Tomczyk has said. Tomczyk made the remarks on Monday while speaking at a high-level panel on Poland’s security situation, suggesting that his country had already entered a state just below the level of actual war. “What we are facing in Poland today is de facto hybrid warfare. And we can say directly that Poland is in a state of war today, but in a state of hybrid warfare,” he stated, as quoted by PAP news agency. He pointed to the situation on the border with Belarus, as well as incidents where weather balloons appeared in Polish airspace. Warsaw has for years accused Minsk of trying to pressure it by sending illegal migrants across the border.
Belarus has denied the allegations while accusing Polish authorities of brutal treatment of the migrants. In recent months, Polish authorities also reported several cases of Russian balloons straying into national airspace. Officials in Warsaw investigated the incidents, but concluded that the craft posed no threat to national security. One of the most recent cases occurred in late June, when Poland reported that they had been warned by their Russian counterparts that they had lost control of one of their balloons protecting airspace in the exclave of Kaliningrad. The aircraft strayed into Polish airspace for four and a half hours. Polish authorities said they deliberately did not shoot it down because of “possible negative consequences.”
Tomczyk, however, suggested that the balloon incidents are still intended to promote Russia’s political agenda. “It is de facto a tool for a few hundred dollars, which can be used to influence all of us in a very simple way… It is enough to put a few words in Cyrillic on them, and all portals in Poland will write about it.” He added that the purpose of such tactics is to trigger discussions in Polish society and undermine public trust in the government. The deputy minister said cyberattacks are another facet of the hybrid warfare, which he estimated at about 5,000 a year.
“It could be “five years or more before work starts”.
If you can’t get Elon to do it, just close it down.
• US Nuclear Missile Project At Least 5 Years Behind Schedule – WSJ (RT)
Refurbishing the decades-old missile silos will cost billions of dollars more than originally thought and may not start for five years, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing Pentagon officials. The US Department of Defense decided last month to press on with the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program, even though its estimated cost has almost doubled from the original $78 billion. Replacing the aging Minuteman III missiles has no alternative, the Pentagon said. It could be “five years or more before work starts” on modernizing some 450 existing silos for the new missiles, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday, citing a recent town meeting in Kimball, Nebraska. The community of less than 3,000 residents is surrounded by “one of the biggest missile fields” in the world. “There are a lot of unknowns here, and I understand the frustration,” Brigadier-General Colin Connor told residents earlier this month.
Minuteman III missiles entered service in the early 1970s and were supposed to be replaced after a decade. Washington finally greenlit the Sentinel program in 2020, awarding the initial $13.3 billion contract to Northrop Grumman, after Boeing dropped out. The Sentinel project manager, Colonel Charles Clegg, was sacked in June for unspecified reasons. Along with the new missiles, which are still on the drawing board, the project envisions modernizing the 50-year-old silos and command centers. Construction involves, among other things, laying down thousands of kilometers of fiber-optic cables. However, shutting down the silos or the command facilities is impossible, because the nuclear doctrine requires them to be available at a moment’s notice. Some silos may also need to be rebuilt from scratch.
The scale, scope and complexity of the Sentinel project is “something we haven’t attempted as a nation for over 60 years,” Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Bill LaPlante told reporters last month, insisting that it had to be done nonetheless. The US Air Force is looking for ways to reduce the project’s complexity, but it might take up to 18 months to decide on the changes, LaPlante said, hoping for sometime in early 2025. Such delays may cause problems of another kind for the Pentagon, according to the WSJ. The US government has already negotiated about a third of the real-estate deals needed for laying down thousands of kilometers of fiber-optic cables. But some of them may need to be redone in light of the new timeline. Meanwhile, the rising costs of construction and raw materials have made early cost estimates “be unreliable and unrealistic,” Pentagon officials have said.
Nut splitter
Nut splitters are used to break damaged, seized or rusty nuts that cannot be unscrewed from vehicles or machinery.pic.twitter.com/2yawALVCUm
— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 27, 2024
Happy
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828308193467855004
Attack
https://twitter.com/i/status/1828563078113362089
Baby bat
Woman reunites a baby bat that fell on the street, with its mum
pic.twitter.com/cbCWe9Kr4T— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) August 27, 2024
First toy
First toy after being rescued. pic.twitter.com/11xJbxJFFu
— B&S (@_B___S) August 27, 2024
Heroes
Heroes of the ocean pic.twitter.com/wIhPXwsrSU
— Nature is Amazing ☘️ (@AMAZlNGNATURE) August 27, 2024
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
