War Party Archives - The Automatic Earth

I grew up in the biz – my dad produced Independence Day, my mom worked on Seinfeld. I've seen firsthand what it costs to create worlds on screen. This video from the @thedorbrothers below is mind-blowing.

Software is going through the same shift right now. Writing code is no… https://t.co/U1ecogLzqa
— Matt Van Horn (@mvanhorn) February 16, 2026

Dalio

Ray Dalio just warned everyone…

America is going broke.

Hyperinflation is coming and it’s coming faster than anyone is prepared for.

This is not a drill. pic.twitter.com/uqjDQies4C
— Bark (@barkmeta) February 17, 2026

Ray Dalio just released 500 years of data showing exactly how empires collapse.

His conclusion? America is in Stage 6 of 9.

The dangerous stage.

Here's what his math actually says about where we're headed:

Dalio studied every major empire collapse since 1500.

Dutch. British.… pic.twitter.com/tYDzM5WoFt
— Logan Weaver (@LogWeaver) February 16, 2026

Ed Dowd

Ray Dalio wrote a long piece. Part of his thesis is that China is ascendant versus US.

Nowhere in his analysis does he mention demographics and the issues China are facing.

In our China report we show that GDP priced in dollars for China was 80% of US in 2019. Today it’s 60%.… pic.twitter.com/kbK4e6UsjL
— Edward Dowd (@DowdEdward) February 16, 2026

Deindustrialization was DELIBERATE. https://twitter.com/PrometheanActn/status/2023501026712539320?s=20 China

Kevin O’Leary says the quiet part out loud about what Secretary Rubio’s speech meant in Munich:

“You’re either with us — or you’re not.”

O’Leary then laid out the nightmarish dystopian future if China were to win global dominance.

This was a direct warning to all of Europe.… pic.twitter.com/JE7WkkZDw0
— Overton (@overton_news) February 16, 2026

Will AI command the military?

• Anthropic–Pentagon Talks Stall Over AI Guardrails (ZH)

Contract renewal talks between Anthropic and the Pentagon have stalled over how its Claude system can be used. The AI firm is seeking stricter limits before extending its agreement, according to a person familiar with the private negotiations and Bloomberg. At the heart of the dispute is control. Anthropic wants firm guardrails to prevent Claude from being used for mass surveillance of Americans or to build weapons that operate without human oversight. The Defense Department’s position is broader: it wants flexibility to deploy the model so long as its use complies with the law. The tension reflects a larger debate over how far advanced AI should go in military settings.

Bloomberg writes that Anthropic has tried to distinguish itself as a safety-first AI developer. It created a specialized version, Claude Gov, tailored to U.S. national security work, designed to analyze classified information, interpret intelligence and process cybersecurity data. The company says it aims to serve government clients while staying within its own ethical red lines. “Anthropic is committed to using frontier AI in support of US national security,” a spokesperson said, describing ongoing discussions with the Defense Department as “productive conversations, in good faith.” The Pentagon, however, struck a firmer tone. “Our nation requires that our partners be willing to help our warfighters win in any fight,” spokesman Sean Parnell said, adding that the relationship is under review and emphasizing troop safety.
Some defense officials have grown wary, viewing reliance on Anthropic as a potential supply-chain vulnerability. The department could ask contractors to certify they are not using Anthropic’s models, according to a senior official—an indication that the disagreement could ripple beyond a single contract. Rival AI developers are watching closely. Tools from OpenAI, Google and xAI are also being discussed for Pentagon use, with companies working to ensure their systems can operate within legal boundaries. Anthropic secured a two-year Pentagon deal last year involving Claude Gov and enterprise products, and the outcome of its current negotiations could influence how future agreements with other AI providers are structured.

“.. a median hourly wage of $15 and a median annual salary of $22,620.”

• Behind the Burnout and High Turnover Rates in the AI Industry (ET)

Across the artificial intelligence (AI) supply chain, insiders describe a precarious, high-turnover workforce with limited support and stability. This “invisible” human labor that labels data, evaluates outputs, and filters harmful material has become a revolving door of talent that navigates high-pressure gigs and burnout. Moreover, workers and industry experts say this talent churn can degrade the very AI models that workers are paid to improve. Across the board, workers who are hired to support, evaluate, or operationalize AI systems face similar challenges: high-stress environments that often involve complex tasks, unrealistic timelines, job instability, and low wages.

It’s no secret that the tech industry has long suffered from high turnover rates. Numbers vary, but many studies put the average rate of talent churn in the tech sector at between 13 percent and 18 percent. This becomes clear when considering the cost of replacing tech talent, which can be up to 150 percent of a worker’s salary, including recruitment expenses, onboarding time, productivity losses, and effects on customer relationships.Some have said that the loss of institutional knowledge alone makes worker retention critical. “People love to talk about the ‘magic’ of AI, but the work culture behind it is a meat grinder. I’ve seen talent turnover in model evaluation hit record highs because the work is repetitive and psychologically draining,” Barry Kunst, vice president of marketing at Solix Technologies, told The Epoch Times.
“When you lose a lead researcher to churn, you don’t just lose a body; you lose the ‘why’ behind the model’s safety guardrails.” Kunst said this is why he’s adamant about AI workforce stability, which he said correlates directly with model reliability. “If you’re rotating contractors every six months to keep labor costs low, your data governance will fail, period,” he said.Sovic Chakrabarti, the director of digital marketing agency Icy Tales, told The Epoch Times: “Team turnover is more common than people expect. “In some groups, especially those tied to model training, evaluation, or data labeling pipelines, churn can happen every few months.
“Short contracts, project-based funding, and constant reorganization mean people cycle in and out quickly.” Chakrabarti said he has worked on the development and support side of AI systems long enough to see patterns that, as he put it, “rarely make it into public discussions.” “That [workforce] churn absolutely leads to lost knowledge,” he said. “Important context about why a dataset was filtered a certain way, why a safety rule exists, or why a model behaved oddly in testing often lives in someone’s head. ”When that person leaves, documentation rarely captures the full story, according to Chakrabarti. “New hires inherit systems without understanding the original tradeoffs, which can quietly introduce risks,” he said.
Burnout rates among information technology workers are high. LeadDev’s Engineering Leadership Report 2025 found that 22 percent of the 617 polled engineering leaders and developers felt critically burned out at work. An additional 24 percent of respondents reported feeling “moderately” burned out, while 33 percent reported low levels of burnout. Some of this is driven by job security fears after two years of layoffs at big tech companies, but the pay for many of the workers fueling the AI revolution is often low. The Alphabet Workers Union, Communications Workers of America, and TechEquity led a study on the working conditions of U.S.-based data workers and found conditions similar to those of tech contractors in developing countries.
In a survey of 160 U.S. data workers, 86 percent worried about being able to pay their bills, and 25 percent relied on public assistance to get by. The same group reported a median hourly wage of $15 and a median annual salary of $22,620. Eighty-five percent of the study group said they’re expected to be “on call” for work, but only 30 percent reported being paid for that time. More than a quarter of respondents reported spending more than eight hours per week on call. “If there’s anything I wanted the general public to know, it is that there are low paid people [in the United States] who are not even treated as humans—just little more than employee ID numbers—out there making the 1 billion dollar, trillion dollar AI systems that are supposed to lead our entire society and civilization into the future,” Kirn Gill II, a search quality rater working on Google products at Telus, told the Communications Workers of America.
Chakrabarti said the work culture behind AI fuels these challenges. “There is real pressure to keep labor costs low,” he said. “I have seen unrealistic timelines, understaffed teams, and expectations to ‘do more with less’ while the stakes keep rising. That tension creates stress, especially when the systems affect millions of users.”

“.. the party is so embarrassed by Clinton’s Epstein connections that they’re willing to airbrush him out of history entirely.”

• Bill Clinton Just Got Brutally Dissed By His Own Party (Matt Margolis)

The Democratic Party put together a Presidents’ Day tribute on social media that snubbed one of their most electorally successful presidents in modern history. Bill Clinton, the guy who won two terms and left office with a 66% approval rating, got left out of the party’s official image like the creepy uncle no one wants to sit next to at Thanksgiving dinner. The post from the Democrat Party’s official X account showed a “Happy Presidents’ Day” collage featuring JFK, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, FDR, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. Notice anyone missing? The only Democrat presidents they skipped were Clinton and Harry Truman. You could probably argue that to today’s Democrat Party, all old white men look alike, but Clinton is still quite active in the party, and probably should have been included.

Naturally, the RNC pounced, retweeting the Democrats’ post with a photo of Clinton sitting next to Hillary, both looking appropriately concerned. “Forget someone again??” the caption reads. It’s the kind of burn that lands because everyone knows something weird is happening here. Fox News Digital reached out to the DNC to ask whether leaving Clinton out was intentional, but they didn’t receive an answer. The Clinton Foundation didn’t respond either. That silence speaks volumes when your own party features Jimmy Carter and Joe Biden—two presidents who collectively gave America stagflation, hostage crises, the Afghanistan disaster, and 40-year-high inflation—yet can’t find room for the guy they used to credit with balancing the budget. However, that was technically Newt Gingrich who did that. So, why did Bill get dissed? Fox News Digital offers a theory.
“Clinton, one of the most popular presidents in recent history, was not without his share of scandal. The late Kenneth Starr investigated Clinton for connections to a controversial 1978 land deal in the Ozarks nicknamed “Whitewater” dating to Clinton’s time as Arkansas attorney general. While Clinton was never charged with wrongdoing, Arkansas business partners Jim and Susan McDougal were convicted in connection with the failed Whitewater deal. Hillary Clinton had previously worked for the law firm that represented Jim McDougal’s bank. Gov. Jim Guy Tucker, Clinton’s successor, was also convicted. But the Whitewater case led Starr to discover what became the Monica Lewinsky scandal — wherein Clinton allegedly had a sexual relationship with a White House intern. On January 26, 1998, Clinton famously maintained his innocence in the face of impeachment over Starr’s case, declaring at the end of a childcare policy press conference:”
Not buying that. If presidential scandals were enough to warrant exclusion from the image, Barack Obama would never have made it. Many on social media speculate it has something to do with the fact that Clinton’s name appears all over the Epstein files. He flew on Epstein’s private jet at least 16 times between 2001 and 2003. Recently released documents include photos of Clinton with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, including one showing a shirtless Clinton in a hot tub with someone identified by the DOJ as a victim of Epstein’s abuse.

Missing someone? pic.twitter.com/Wxp1drXQ47
— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) February 16, 2026

Both Bill and Hillary Clinton recently agreed to testify before Congress about their relationship with Epstein after facing potential criminal contempt charges. Sure, they claim House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is employing dirty tricks. Still, when your party won’t even put your picture on a Presidents’ Day card, the only possible explanation is that the party is so embarrassed by Clinton’s Epstein connections that they’re willing to airbrush him out of history entirely.
Happy Presidents’ Day, Bill.

“The procedure for checking in prostitutes is hardly rigorous.”

• The Obama Admin’s Prostitution Scandal And The Ruemmler-Epstein Connection (ZH)

Remember Obama’s 2012 Colombian prostitution scandal? Turns out, Jeffrey Epstein was involved… Newly released Department of Justice documents from the Epstein files have exposed a previously unknown connection between a 2012 White House advance-team scandal in Cartagena, Colombia, and Kathryn Ruemmler – the former Obama White House counsel who later became Goldman Sachs’ top lawyer. Ruemmler resigned from Goldman late last week, after the latest Epstein document dump revealed her extensive, affectionate, and years-long correspondence with the convicted sex offender.

The emails show she called him “Uncle Jeffrey,” accepted expensive gifts, and turned to him for advice on sensitive legal and reputational matters – including how to respond to a 2014 Washington Post report that accused her of helping suppress evidence of prostitution involving a rich kid White House aide whose daddy was a huge Obama donor. The WaPo report, by all accounts, cost Ruemmler a job as Obama’s Attorney General.
The 2012 Cartagena Prostitution Scandal
In April 2012, ahead of President Obama’s trip to the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena, Colombia, at least 20 Secret Service agents, military personnel, and others were involved in hiring prostitutes. The scandal led to multiple firings and disciplinary actions. A lesser-known element involved Jonathan Dach, a 25-year-old Yale Law student and unpaid White House advance-team volunteer (son of prominent Democratic donor Leslie Dach). Hotel records obtained by investigators showed a prostitute was checked into Dach’s room at the Hilton Cartagena shortly after midnight on April 3, 2012.
Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan briefed White House counsel Kathryn Ruemmler on the evidence. The White House conducted a review, interviewed advance-team members (including Dach), and publicly declared “no indication of any misconduct” by White House personnel. Dach was later cleared and went on to work at the State Department. More recently, Dach was found to have ‘chronically violated state rules’ in his role as former chief of staff to Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) by using a state vehicle as his personal car for nearly two years “and driving at speeds constituting reckless driving under Connecticut law.”
The 2014 Washington Post Revival and Ruemmler’s Response
In October 2014, while Ruemmler was in private practice at Latham & Watkins and reportedly under consideration to replace Eric Holder as Attorney General – WaPo published new details. Reporters Carol D. Leonnig and David Nakamura revealed that the White House had received specific evidence (hotel records and witness accounts) implicating a White House advance-team member but had not fully investigated or disclosed it. On October 9, 2014, Epstein emailed Ruemmler: “Doing fine. Was talking to reporters until late in the morning last night. Trying to isolate/contain wapo.”mOn October 17, 2014, Ruemmler forwarded Epstein a draft of her response to the Post reporter and asked for his input. In the draft she downplayed the allegations, writing:
“The whole thing is ridiculous – they had to obtain the record ‘under the table’ because the last thing the Hilton wanted to do is to voluntarily give over info implicating the privacy of their guests. The procedure for checking in prostitutes is hardly rigorous.”

“When asked what question he most wanted answered upon becoming president, Obama joked that it was: “where are the aliens?“

• Aliens Are ‘Real’ – Obama (RT)

Former US President Barack Obama has said he believes that aliens are “real” but dismissed longstanding conspiracy theories that the US is concealing proof of extraterrestrial life at a secretive military facility called Area 51. Obama made the remarks on the No Lie podcast with Brian Tyler Cohen released on Saturday. Asked whether aliens “are real,” the ex-president replied in the affirmative, adding “I haven’t seen them, and they’re not being kept in Area 51.” “There’s no underground facility, unless there’s this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States,” he added.

When asked what question he most wanted answered upon becoming president, Obama joked that it was: “where are the aliens?” Area 51 is a highly classified US Air Force facility at Groom Lake in southern Nevada. The CIA officially acknowledged the site’s existence in 2013, when declassified documents revealed it had been used since 1955 to test the U-2 spy plane and other experimental aircraft. The facility’s secrecy sparked decades of speculation about extraterrestrial research, including theories that crashed alien spacecraft were stored there and that it was a venue for meetings with extraterrestrials. There have been a few UFO sightings in the area, but the CIA claimed they were test flights of the U-2 spy plane.
However, conspiracy theories have also been fueled by hundreds of alleged UFO sightings elsewhere. Pentagon officials told Congress in May 2022 that there were nearly 400 reports of unidentified aerial phenomena by military personnel, up from 144 tracked between 2004 and 2021. In 2024, the Pentagon stressed, however, that it had “no evidence to indicate extraterrestrial life has visited the planet.” Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said that he was not a “believer” in extraterrestrial life, adding, though, that he had met with “serious people that say there’s some really strange things that they see flying around out there.”

“..a $100 million kickback scheme in Ukraine’s struggling energy sector.”

• Zelensky Launches F-bomb Laden Rant In Munich (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky delivered a profanity-laden tirade urging Western countries to expel Russian citizens, including students.Speaking to Politico Playbook on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference Saturday, Zelensky called on US President Donald Trump and European leaders to ramp up sanctions against Moscow.“Europeans still didn’t put sanctions on nuclear energy of Russians, on [the state-run energy company] Rosatom, on people, on their relatives, on their children which live in Europe, which live in the United States, which study in the universities of Europe, which have real estate in the United States,” Zelensky said. “So, they have a lot of real estate, they have children, relatives everywhere. F**k away to Russia. Go home,” he added.

Zelensky’s remarks come as the US, Russia, and Ukraine prepare for a third round of three-way talks in Geneva. Moscow has criticized measures targeting Russian nationals and cultural “cancellation” abroad as Russophobia. The trip also comes amid a conscription crisis and ongoing blackouts in Ukraine caused by Russian air strikes, which Russia says aim to weaken Ukraine’s defense production. Zelensky’s reputation has been tarnished by multiple corruption scandals involving his inner circle, prompting the resignation of two government ministers and his longtime chief of staff. On Monday, anti-corruption agencies charged former Energy Minister German Galushchenko with money laundering linked to a $100 million kickback scheme in Ukraine’s struggling energy sector.

Very correct: “Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.”

• The War Party Takes Munich (Kosachev)

This year’s Munich Security Conference was not merely disappointing; it was pointless. It produced no new ideas and no added value. Instead, it resembled a rally of a self-styled “coalition of the willing” for war. That, unfortunately, is consistent with Germany’s long tradition of failing to draw the right lessons from history. Western European leaders spoke almost exclusively about rearmament and the creation of an independent military capability aimed, openly or implicitly, at confrontation with Russia. The tone was unmistakable: preparation for war, not peace. At the same time, participants repeated the familiar mantra that “more must be done” to ensure Ukraine’s victory. The contradiction went largely unnoticed. What emerged instead was a disturbing impression that Western Europe’s war party has overwhelmed everything else, including common sense and the instinct for self-preservation.

There was something unsettlingly familiar about the atmosphere. One could not help recalling Germany in the spring of 1945, when defeat was inevitable yet resistance continued with fanatical intensity, sustained by fantasies of miracle weapons. In Munich itself, Bavarian Gauleiter Paul Giesler crushed an attempted surrender on April 28, 1945 by executing Wehrmacht officers and civilians who wanted to hand the city over to the Americans without a fight. Hitler rewarded this “loyalty” by appointing Giesler interior minister the day before his own suicide. Within days, Giesler shot his wife and then himself. History rarely repeats itself neatly, but it often rhymes, and Munich echoed loudly this year.
On stage, European figures such as Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, alongside American voices like Senator Roger Wicker, openly called for supplying Ukraine with ever more advanced weapons, including Tomahawk missiles, described with an alarming casualness as if it were a modern “wunderwaffe.” The old refrain was repeated yet again: Ukraine can win, but Russia is also poised to attack NATO. This logical contradiction has become a permanent feature of Western discourse.
Washington, for its part, played along. But cautiously. This time, it sent the ‘good cop’: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in contrast to last year’s ‘bad cop’, J.D. Vance. Gone were the blunt warnings about Western Europe’s inevitable collapse if it stayed the course. Instead came soothing assurances of American support and solidarity. Yet the underlying message remained unchanged: without the United States, the EU cannot survive. The transatlantic alliance was not restored; it was merely cosmetically repaired. Zelensky received the expected applause from Munich’s hawkish audience and once again demanded security guarantees from Washington. In plain terms, he was asking the United States to commit itself to direct war with Russia.
Germany, meanwhile, declared its readiness to rearm and assume leadership of the Western slice of Europe in a new confrontation with Moscow. At the same time, Emmanuel Macron cautiously signalled that the bloc must eventually negotiate with Russia. Albeit, if only to avoid being excluded altogether while talks proceed in a Russia-Ukraine-US format. He even floated extending the French and British nuclear umbrella to other NATO members. In other words, “all quiet on the Western Front.” Once again, the conclusion is unavoidable: there is little to be gained from dialogue with this EU. And furthermore, one is reminded why it was precisely “civilized” and “enlightened” Europe that became the cradle of the two most devastating wars in human history.
Equally telling were the subjects that never surfaced. Talk of corruption in Ukraine, or of where Western funds are going, or when accountability will begin, was absent. So too was the fate of Venezuela’s leadership and the precedent set for international law. Iran was barely mentioned, despite last year’s US-Israeli military actions and the obvious risks of escalation. Even Greenland appeared only in whispered conversations offstage. Why complicate matters, when invoking the Russian threat remains the safest and most reliable option? That, in essence, is all one needs to know about this year’s Munich Conference. A forum with a promising youth and a respectable maturity, now drifting toward ideological exhaustion.

“Territory has, inevitably, grown in importance over time. But the core issue has remained unchanged: the principles governing security on the continent.”

• The US Wants a Deal. Russia Wants a System (Lukyanov)

After last August’s meeting between the Russian and American presidents in Alaska, a new phrase entered diplomatic circulation: the “spirit of Anchorage.” The substance of the talks was never officially disclosed and can only be reconstructed from selective leaks. The form, however, was striking: a personal greeting, an honor guard, a shared limousine. Symbolism mattered. It was meant to signal seriousness. Yet the question remains: what exactly was born in Anchorage? And does it belong in the lineage of earlier diplomatic “spirits” that once defined entire eras? The term itself is not new. Before Anchorage, there was the “spirit of Yalta,” the “spirit of Helsinki,” and, briefly, the “spirit of Malta.”

All three marked turning points in relations between the great powers during the second half of the twentieth century. Yalta in 1945 laid the foundations of the post-war world order, recognizing the USSR and the United States as its central pillars. Helsinki in 1975 codified that order, even as it quietly set the stage for its eventual erosion. Malta in 1989 symbolized the end of the Cold War and, with it, the division of Europe.These meetings differed in format and outcome. Yalta brought together three victorious powers dividing spheres of influence. Helsinki was the product of prolonged multilateral negotiations designed to stabilize a tense status quo. Malta was a bilateral encounter that effectively ratified the retreat of one side under the banner of a “new world order.” But they shared one defining feature: each sought to determine the parameters of the international system itself.
Does Anchorage belong in this tradition? Formally speaking, the Alaskan talks focused on Ukraine. That immediately raises a fundamental question. How realistic is it to reach a durable settlement without the direct participation of one of the warring parties? Such an approach is only viable if one of the interlocutors, in this case the United States, is both willing and able to compel Kiev to accept decisions taken without it. Events since August suggest that Washington lacks this capacity, despite its considerable leverage. A more convincing explanation, however, is that it lacks the motivation. Donald Trump has made resolving the Ukrainian conflict a matter of personal prestige. But prestige is not the same as strategic necessity. For Trump and the narrow circle around him, the precise configuration of a settlement matters less than the avoidance of an outright Russian victory. Beyond that, the exact line of demarcation, and the conditions under which it is maintained, are not critical.
The United States would only deploy the full weight of its political and economic power if it perceived these negotiations as shaping a new world order. That was the case at Yalta, Helsinki, and Malta. It is not the case today. Moscow, by contrast, has invested Anchorage with precisely this broader meaning. From the very beginning of the military operation, Russia has framed the conflict not primarily in territorial terms, but as a question of European security architecture. Territory has, inevitably, grown in importance over time. But the core issue has remained unchanged: the principles governing security on the continent.
Today, this is often described as the question of “security guarantees for Ukraine.” In reality, it concerns the broader system within which such guarantees would exist. This may ultimately prove the most serious obstacle to any agreement. Washington’s approach is different. The current American administration does not think in terms of comprehensive frameworks or shared rules. Its vision of world order is far more fragmented and instrumental. Control is exercised through economic pressure, military presence, and political leverage applied selectively to specific regions and problems. It is a model of targeted intervention rather than systemic design. A kind of forceful acupuncture.
In this context, agreements are not about principles, but about transactions. They are designed to deliver concrete, often mercantile, outcomes rather than to establish enduring rules of interaction. Ukraine, from this perspective, is one issue among many, not the axis around which a new order would be built. If the goal is merely a political settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, the Russian-American format is insufficient. Ukraine itself would have to be involved, as would Europe. While Europe’s strategic weight is limited, it retains a significant capacity to obstruct any settlement it finds unacceptable. Ignoring this reality would be a mistake.
For the “spirit of Anchorage” to stand alongside Yalta, Helsinki, and Malta, it would need to aim higher: at the construction of a new global political system to replace the one that emerged after the Second World War and has endured, in various forms, for nearly 80 years. Washington does not see Moscow as a central interlocutor in such a project. At most, this role is tentatively assigned to China. However, even that is far from settled. As a result, the “spirit of Anchorage” hovers uneasily between two incompatible interpretations of what the conversation is actually about.
From the Russian perspective, it is about redefining the foundations of European and global security. From the American side, it is about managing a specific conflict without altering the broader architecture of power. When the parties are not even discussing the same subject, the risk is obvious. In such circumstances, the “spirit” inevitably fades, becoming less a guiding force than a rhetorical shadow. A ghost of an agreement that never quite came into being. Could this change? Possibly, but only if events intervene that force both sides to move beyond regional calculations and confront the need for a more fundamental reordering. Until then, Anchorage remains suspended between ambition and reality, its promise unfulfilled.

Complex.

• The Middle East Is Splitting Into Rival Blocs (Sadygzade)

Across the globe, the post-Cold War settlement that once carried the promise of Western primacy is no longer taken as an unshakeable fact. Its vocabulary remains in circulation, yet real-time history continues to contest its authority. In the space left behind, many states are seeking a different idea of order, one that sounds less like instruction from a single center and more like negotiated balance among several centers. In such a moment, regions that were once treated as arenas begin to behave like authors. The Greater Middle East is one of the first places where this change is becoming visible as a messy strategic recomposition in which security is no longer outsourced and alliances are no longer assumed to be permanent.

For decades, a simple model dominated strategic thinking in the region. Washington would remain the ultimate guarantor, and regional states would calibrate their risks inside the umbrella of American deterrence. That model did not always prevent wars, but it provided a framework for expectation. Even when trust frayed, the underlying assumption was that the US could be induced to act, and that the cost of ignoring its interests would be prohibitive. In recent years, however, the region has experienced a succession of shocks that have made the old calculus feel less reliable.
One of the most dramatic was the Israeli strike in Doha in September 2025, an operation that pushed a long-simmering anxiety into the open by showing how quickly escalation could breach political red lines in the Gulf. If such an event could occur with only limited external restraint, then the notion of an automatic security backstop began to look like a story the region told itself rather than a guarantee the system could still deliver.
It was in this atmosphere that the Saudi-Pakistani Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement, signed in September 2025, drew intense attention. It suggested that major regional players were preparing for a future in which protection would be organized through layered partnerships rather than delegated to a single patron. Analysts noted that the pact followed a pattern of disappointment with external responses, including perceptions of American restraint or hesitation when regional allies felt exposed. Whether the agreement functions as a hard war guarantee or as a strategic warning, it belongs to a wider movement in which states are building options.
Two emerging security configurations are now becoming visible across the Greater Middle East, and it is important to name their participants clearly. On one side, a prospective bloc is coalescing around Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, and Oman, with this core increasingly presented as a sovereignty-driven framework meant to reduce reliance on external guarantees and to deter destabilizing escalation, while Qatar, Algeria, and several other states observe this alignment with growing interest as a possible partner network rather than as a formal membership.
On the other side, a countervailing alignment is taking shape around Israel and the United Arab Emirates, whose partnership is reinforced by defense industrial cooperation and advanced technology collaboration, and whose strategic reach is further strengthened by Azerbaijan, which acts less as a conventional member than as a pivotal partner connecting overlapping networks because it maintains close ties to Türkiye while simultaneously sustaining deep security and energy links with Israel and expanding cooperation with Abu Dhabi.

” In the 2017/18 tax year Ratcliffe was the fifth highest taxpayer in the country, footing a bill of £110.5 million.”

• In Defence of Sir Jim Ratcliffe (Charles Johnson)

Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s statement that Britain has been “colonised by immigrants” has sparked a fierce reaction. From Starmer to Bluesky, to the Athletic and all the football social media pundits in between, the co-owner of Manchester United has been bombarded with the same attack lines repeatedly. He has been called a tax dodging, racist immigrant hypocrite. Such an uproar has flared up in such a short space of time because Ratcliffe is radically different from those who have issued similar statements before. Ratcliffe is not a political figure: you do not see billionaires nor football club owners voicing discontent like this. The pushback has been fierce because Ratcliffe has no political incentive to say any of this. He isn’t running for office, seeking favour, or chasing votes — which makes his intervention harder to dismiss. Part of the backlash, too, reflects an unease that his diagnosis may be accurate.

The remarks came from an initial conversation regarding the economic challenges Britain faces in general, not solely on immigration. The snippet that has been so widely shared is merely part of a wider statement of the economic problems Britain faces; Ratcliffe refers to the issues of “immigration” and “nine million people” on benefits simultaneously. Colonised is a strong opening salvo for a figure such as Ratcliffe, who is not known for any previous anti-migration stance. This generated responses of tone policing from his critics – cries that his choice of words were “disgraceful and deeply divisive” and that “this language and leadership has no place in English football” from Kick It Out, a notable “Anti Racism” football pressure group. There was no attempt to argue or debate: this was no more than tone policing, of “mate mate mate, you can’t say that mate”. It did not engage with the substantive point. It was not an argument.
The Prime Minister has pushed for Ratcliffe to apologise. Less than a year ago, Starmer was referring to Britain as an ”Island of Strangers”; he has little argument here. Sir Ed Davey has stated that Ratcliffe is “totally wrong” and is “out of step with British Values”. Once again this is weak tone policing, not an argument. Regardless, which British values are being violated in particular? What are British values precisely meant to mean here? The fact is that Ratcliffe’s vocabulary choice is nowhere near as divisive as the impacts of mass migration in the last quarter century.
Mass migration is the most important issue in British political debate. It has bought sectarianism, Bengali and Palestinian politics swinging both local council and Parliamentary elections, a deepening of housing crisis, the rape and murder of British women from taxpayer funded hotels and programs which bloat the welfare state even further. It is undeniable mass migration has defined British politics of the 2010s onwards. It has been much more harmful and divisive than any comment made by Sir Jim Ratcliffe. His words are nothing compared to the actions of Deng Chol Majek, or Hedash Kebatu, to name a couple of examples.
Critics have also cried that Ratcliffe is “an immigrant himself, dodging tax in Monaco”. The difference between Ratcliffe and migration into Britain is so different they are almost incomparable. In the 2017/18 tax year Ratcliffe was the fifth highest taxpayer in the country, footing a bill of £110.5 million. With such an extraordinarily high bill, it is no wonder that he has since moved to Monaco. Meanwhile, the average salary of of a migrant entering Britain in 2023 (which has fallen by £10,000 since 2021) was £32,946, according to a report by the Centre for Migration Control. From this we can estimate a migrant would pay about £5,000 in income tax. That means it would take over 22,000 (statistically average) migrants to foot the tax bill that Ratcliffe paid in one year alone. Ratcliffe has been an exceptional cash cow to the British state. He has been taxed incredible amounts and contributed more to this country than almost anyone currently living; to call him hypocritical since he dared to criticise migration and its impact on the welfare state is simply not fair.
Census data from the ONS in 2021 shows that migrants from four nations – Somalia, Nigeria, Jamaica and Bangladesh – head over 104,000 social homes in London alone. With such incredible numbers of subsidised housing going to foreign born nationals, it is absolutely correct to state that mass migration is costing the British economy a fortune. The same census states that over 70% of Somali born households are in social housing in England and Wales, whilst also being of lowest contributors to income tax in the nation – paying well under the £5,000 stated per head previously. The increase and sheer scale of benefit reliance for many immigrants in Britain is not sustainable, and it is a problem that is right to be addressed.
Perhaps the most nonsensical argument presented by some is that as co-owner of Manchester United he employs a significant number of immigrant players. Bruno Fernandes is not living in social housing in Wythenshawe. Benjamin Sesko is not in a single bed council flat in Hulme. When he arrived in Manchester last year, the first thing Senne Lammens did was not register for Universal Credit. Not a single foreign player is a drain on the state. They are, as elite athletes in the most lucrative league in the world, very clearly exceptions to the norm of British migration. The difference between Bruno Fernandes, who earns a reported £300,000 a week, and the over 40% of Bangladeshi immigrants who are economically inactive should really not need spelling out. We are referring to just 17 foreign senior team players who all earn more in a week than the average migrant – or Brit – will earn in a year. It is ludicrous to even attempt to compare the two. Regardless, employing or working with immigrants does not mean you waive your right to criticise the state of affairs in Britain. As an Englishman, Sir Jim Ratcliffe has a given and inalienable right to comment on the affairs of his country.

“The move by DOJ is extremely rare — but not unprecedented — considering Bannon was already convicted and served time in prison. ”

• Trump DOJ Seeks To Dismiss Steve Bannon’s J6 Conviction and Indictment (JTN)

In a stunning reversal, the Trump Justice Department on Monday asked the Supreme Court and a federal judge to dismiss the criminal contempt indictment and conviction of Steve Bannon for refusing to testify in the January 6 investigation by Congress, declaring such a request is in the “interests of justice” after years of politically weaponized lawfare by Democrats. The move by DOJ is extremely rare — but not unprecedented — considering Bannon was already convicted and served time in prison. “The government has determined in its prosecutorial discretion that dismissal of this criminal case is in the interests of justice,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in a brief to the nine justices, who were reviewing an appeal from Bannon’s lawyers.

“The government has accordingly lodged a motion in the district court under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a) to vacate the judgment and dismiss the indictment with prejudice,” the motion also states The filing noted that the law “allows the government to seek dismissal even after a jury finds the defendant guilty and the district court enters judgment.” Separately, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Perro asked a federal judge in Washington D.C. to vacate Bannon‘s conviction and dismiss the indictment. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told Just the News that the Democrat-led House January 6 Select Committee was part of a larger weaponization machine that abused the justice system.
“Today the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court that Steve Bannon’s conviction arising from the J6 ‘Unselect’ Committee’s improper subpoena should be vacated,” Blanche said. “Under the leadership of Attorney General Bondi, this Department will continue to undo the prior administration’s weaponization of the justice system.” The request to the two courts to abandon Bannon’s case is the latest twist in a five-year legal saga. The Democrat-led House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol issued a subpoena on Sept. 23, 2021, to Bannon demanding documents and testimony related to the 2020 presidential election and the Jan. 6 attack.
Bannon, a private citizen, had been a policy adviser to President Donald Trump for approximately seven months in 2017. He declined to produce any documents, and the House voted the next month to hold him in contempt of Congress. On Nov. 12, 2021, federal prosecutors in the Biden administration secured a grand jury indictment against Bannon on two counts of criminal contempt of Congress. He was convicted and served time in prison.

“I provided office space for him and his Rainbow Coalition, for years, in the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street..”

“He had much to do with the Election, without acknowledgment or credit, of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who Jesse could not stand..”

• Trump’s Surpising Reaction to Jesse Jackson’s Death (Matt Margolis)

Jesse Jackson, the polarizing civil rights figure and race hustler, died Tuesday morning at age 84. Though his cause of death was not immediately shared, he had been previously diagnosed with a rare neurological disorder called progressive supranuclear palsy, which is reportedly similar to Parkinson’s disease. While the media will inevitably lionize him as a civil rights icon, Jackson’s legacy is far more complicated—marked by allegations of extortion, self-promotion, the notorious exaggeration of his role in the events surrounding Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, and his blatant attempts to be seen as King’s successor in the civil rights movement. You can read more about that in my colleague Rick Moran’s piece here.

President Donald Trump, who knew Jackson for decades before their political paths diverged, has weighed in on the controversial figure’s death with a lengthy and personal statement on Truth Social, reflecting on their long relationship. And it’s not at all what I expected. Last year, Trump’s reaction to the death of Rob Reiner and his wife was rather — well, let’s just say I wasn’t a fan of it. Naturally, I was expecting something similar about Jackson, and I was surprised to see it wasn’t like that at all. “The Reverend Jesse Jackson is Dead at 84,” Trump wrote. “I knew him well, long before becoming President.” He described Jackson as “a good man, with lots of personality, grit, and ‘street smarts,’” adding, “He was very gregarious – Someone who truly loved people!”
Trump also took aim at Jackson’s critics, noting, “Despite the fact that I am falsely and consistently called a Racist by the Scoundrels and Lunatics on the Radical Left, Democrats ALL, it was always my pleasure to help Jesse along the way.” He detailed several ways he says he supported Jackson and causes important to him. “I provided office space for him and his Rainbow Coalition, for years, in the Trump Building at 40 Wall Street,” Trump said. He also pointed to his criminal justice reform efforts, writing that he “Responded to [Jackson’s] request for help in getting CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM passed and signed, when no other President would even try.”
Trump further cited his administration’s record on historically black colleges and universities. He said he “Single handedly pushed and passed long term funding for Historically Black Colleges & Universities (HBCUs), which Jesse loved, but also, which other Presidents would not do.” In addition, he noted that he “Responded to Jesse’s support for Opportunity Zones, the single most successful economic development package yet approved for Black business men/women, and much more.”
Calling Jackson “a force of nature like few others before him,” Trump also made a striking claim about Jackson’s political influence. “He had much to do with the Election, without acknowledgment or credit, of Barack Hussein Obama, a man who Jesse could not stand,” Trump wrote. Trump concluded by offering condolences to Jackson’s loved ones. “He loved his family greatly, and to them I send my deepest sympathies and condolences. Jesse will be missed!”

“My constituency is the desperate, the damned, the disinherited, the disrespected and the despised.. ”

• Race Hustler or Civil Rights Icon? Jesse Jackson Dead At 84 (Rick Moran)

He was a con artist and a “race pimp.” He was an opportunist, a race hustler, and a corporate shakedown expert who enriched himself by using funds earmarked for “the cause” for his own personal gain. He was an admirer of notorious racist and virulent antisemite Louis Farrakhan.Jesse Jackson, who died on Tuesday at the age of 84, was all of that. He was also one of the greatest orators of the 20th century, a groundbreaking political figure, one of the best political strategists in American history, and a towering figure in local Chicago Democratic politics. You can’t look at Jesse Jackson as a one-dimensional stick figure. Like all humans, especially those who have left their mark on history, he was a mix of the good, the bad, and the ugly. You can’t simplify his sins or his enormous contributions to American politics. He was a force whose impact will be felt for generations.

There is no doubting Jesse Jackson’s impact on American history. He was the first “serious” black candidate for president in that he energized the base of the Democratic Party in a multi-racial coalition that forced the party to swing hard left. His grassroots coalition, known as “Operation Push,” was the most dynamic organization in the U.S. until a scandal brought it down.He was given the opportunity to speak in prime time in the 1984 and 1988 conventions despite finishing far behind Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis in the nomination race. Both speeches are considered among the finest convention speeches in American history. “My constituency is the desperate, the damned, the disinherited, the disrespected and the despised,” Mr. Jackson said at the 1984 Democratic National Convention in San Francisco. “They are restless and seek relief.”
“His transcendent rhetoric was inseparable from an imperfect human being whose ego, instinct for self-promotion, and personal failings were a source of unending irritation to many friends and admirers and targets for derision by many critics,” writes the New York Times. Prominent black social critic Stanley Crouch once said that Jackson “will be forever doomed by his determination to mythologize his life. That mythologizing began in earnest within minutes of the assassination of Martin Luther King in Memphis in 1968. While the rest of King’s inner circle was in shock, Jackson seized the moment, looking to wrest the mantle of “civil rights leader” from any of King’s close associates.
New York Times: “He was one of several aides who rushed toward Dr. King after he was shot. Later that night, Mr. Jackson hurried back to Chicago, parts of which were in flames in the unrest that followed the assassination. The next morning, he appeared on the “Today” show wearing the olive turtleneck sweater, blotted with blood, that he had worn the day before in Memphis. At a memorial convocation of the Chicago City Council that day, he declared, “I come here with a heavy heart because on my chest is the stain of blood from Dr. King’s head.” He added: “He went through, literally, a crucifixion. I was there. And I’ll be there for the resurrection.”
At least once publicly, he indicated that he was the last person to speak with Dr. King and that he had held his bloodied head as Dr. King lay dying. Others who were there said it never happened. Mr. Jackson’s account changed over time, from cradling Dr. King’s head to reaching toward it.If Mr. Jackson had been a figure of suspicion before, he became an object of outrage after Dr. King’s death. Some in Dr. King’s inner circle — including his eventual successor, Mr. Abernathy, and Hosea Williams, both of whom rushed to Dr. King when he was shot — questioned the accuracy of Mr. Jackson’s account and resented what they saw as his calculated grab to seize the spotlight as the First Mourner.
Over the decades, the story Jackson would tell about where he was and what he did during the assassination would go through several iterations. The storytelling revealed Jackson as a man desperate to be seen as King’s anointed successor. “If no one could replace Dr. King, Mr. Jackson was the one who spent most of his life trying,” writes the Times. It was never to be. Jackson couldn’t get out of the way of his own biases and racist dogmas. Where King reached out and begged for understanding, Jackson fueled the fires of racial division, while trying to claim he was a uniter, not a divider. His comments about New York City being “hymietown,” his friendship with Nation of Islam leader Farrakhan, and his insistence on being anywhere and everywhere a racial incident occurred in order to grab the spotlight and try to “racialize” the issue caused resentment and disgust among friend and foe alike. v
His “shakedowns” of corporate America, where he threatened companies with boycotts unless they adopted policies he prescribed (and donated cash to Operation PUSH), were outrageous and bordered on extortion. Jackson’s success as a political organizer was nothing short of astonishing. His 1988 presidential campaign was so successful that the Democrats were forced into trying to sideline him by putting up the white liberal governor of Massachusetts, Michael Dukakis.
He tried again in 1988, and this time he began as a party heavyweight. In the Super Tuesday primary on March 8, he ran first or second in 16 of the 21 primaries and caucuses. Party leaders, fearing they could not win a general election with an assertively left-wing Black presidential candidate, desperately looked for an alternative. In the end, Gov. Michael S. Dukakis of Massachusetts won the nomination, even though Mr. Jackson had earned almost seven million primary votes — 29 percent of the total.
No radical left candidate would come close to matching that total until Bernie Sanders in 2016. There is little doubt that Jesse Jackson was one of the primary personalities responsible for dragging the Democratic Party to the far left. Through his rhetoric and consummate organizing skills, Jackson made a huge impact on the Democratic Party and thus, on American history.

“Rest in peace, Reverend. America owes you a massive debt of gratitude. ”

• Regarding the Rev (Christian Josi)

We lost an icon today. While it wasn’t entirely shocking considering his health condition, it certainly shocked me and, I imagine, many of us. He was an icon. Fought for others his entire life. Was at Dr. Martin Luther King’s side as he was assassinated. Did amazing work through Rainbow PUSH. My children watched him when he appeared on Sesame Street and thought he was cool. He was cool indeed. Imperfect? Yes, but aren’t we all… I met and befriended him later in his life. I’ll get to that.

But first, an old memory. It was 1984, and he was running for president. I was in college, living with my mother in Redlands, Calif. There is a place called the Redlands Bowl, which is sort of like a local Greek Theater… an outdoor venue. My mom’s house was a mile away. While at the time I was not a fan, I heard his speech from my bedroom. That powerful voice. And it impressed the young me. That strong, passionate voice… As for the meeting and befriending, I’ve been a longtime conservative (now libertarian) activist, but I have always sought out friends on the other side. My best friend from the other side is Dr. Julianne Malveaux, whom I used to watch on tv and get pissed off at.
When I moved to Washington years ago, a mutual friend put us together, and we became instant pals. Her work and history impressed me. Whilst rarely on the same page ideologically, our passions matched. Passion is power. No one had more passion or power than The Rev. Dr. Malveaux invited me two years ago to his annual MLK Day breakfast event. Before it began, she took me backstage. JD Pritzker was there, other important people, but I didn’t care. I just wanted to see him. In the flesh.
And what a nice visit it was. I introduced myself, and he said, “I know who you are, Josi”… as he looked me straight in the eye and shook my hand tight. It was a moment I will never forget. That’s when he won my loyalty. I saw his soul. The soul was a beautiful one.The look in his eye… the unexpected respect. We are a diverse nation. We can agree to disagree, but we cannot afford to be unkind to one another. Jesse liked everyone, as I saw firsthand. Maybe didn’t always agree, but there was respect. That’s the point. It’s not at all about partisanship; it’s about decency. Respect. Keeping Hope Alive is not a joke. It’s a fact. Now more than ever.
Rest in peace, Reverend. America owes you a massive debt of gratitude. And I owe you as well. Thank you for changing my view, for influencing me, and for your work to make our nation better.

Too much conversation, not enough logic.

• Mr. Wonderful Destroyed CNN’s Anti-SAVE Act Narrative in 30 Seconds (Margolis)

Entrepreneur Kevin O’Leary was on CNN’s NewsNight Monday, where he wiped the floor with the panel over the SAVE Act. This bill does two simple things: It requires proof of citizenship to register to vote and a photo ID to vote. But you know how this goes — the usual suspects on the panel called it “voter suppression.” O’Leary cut through the noise with clean, clear logic, essentially making the point that it is stupid the United States hasn’t already implemented this before. Leigh McGowan, a podcaster you’ve probably never heard of, sparked the debate by declaring, “I think the thing is that the SAVE Act is a voter suppression act wrapped up as a Voter Protection Act. That is not what we’re doing here. We are trying to make it incredibly difficult for certain people to vote.”

She went on about “nationalized elections” and the “federal government taking over what is a state’s job,” invoking “states’ rights,” and lamenting that bills like the John Lewis Voting Rights Act and the For the People Act had failed (even though those were actual efforts to nationalize elections). “What we’re doing here is not that,” she said. “We’re talking about having ICE around voting places. We’re talking about taking people and making them afraid.” That has nothing to do with the SAVE Act, but I digress.
Eventually, Kevin O’Leary stepped in and did what leftists dread: He brought up facts. “This narrative has to be bipartisan by every metric,” he began. “Every 24 months, we go through this debate over and over again when every country — in the Nordic countries, in Europe, France, Switzerland, Canada, Australia — solved this problem decades ago.” He broke it down to the basics. “You’ve got to be a citizen to vote. You got to prove it. We all agree at the table on that one.”Then he landed the blow. “There’s such advancement in technology to make sure there’s no cheating. We should implement it here and get all this crapola over with. It’s getting almost boring. Every 24 months, ‘Oh, the election’s rigged!’ ‘Oh, this guy’s doing this, this guy’s doing that.’ No other country has this narrative.”
McGowan tried to defuse it with a half-joking concession. “Kevin, I agree with you. It is getting incredibly boring.” “It’s ridiculous,” O’Leary told her. McGowan, likely realizing the hole she’d dug, tried again: “We talk about this all the time. It’s incredibly boring. But it’s also not an actual problem. Like when you look at the statistics, voting — illegals voting — is not an actual problem in this country. You do need to show ID to be able to vote.”That’s not actually true. Only a handful of states actually require a photo ID to vote. Nevertheless, O’Leary replied, “But you agree, if you’re not a citizen, you can’t vote.” That forced McGowan into agreeing with the core principle of the SAVE Act. “I would agree with that,” she said, “but that’s not what the problem is.
The problem is that we have 0.001% of people that are illegally voting.” She rattled off statistics from the Heritage Foundation and the Brennan Center, trying to reduce the whole issue to a rounding error and claim that the SAVE Act is somehow unnecessary. Abby Phillip broke in again, perhaps realizing O’Leary had shifted the debate onto plain common sense. “It’s already illegal,” she reminded. McGowan echoed, “No one is doing that.”“So why don’t you just say if you cheat and steal and you’re illegal, you go to jail?” O’Leary asked. It’s a fair question. The left claims that fraudulent voting isn’t an actual problem, yet they fight like hell to ensure we don’t pass laws to enforce what they claim isn’t even happening. You can’t have it both ways.

SKY https://twitter.com/forallcurious/status/2023522805179183424?s=20 https://twitter.com/ScottJenningsKY/status/2023498116046221337?s=20

Elon Musk warned them three years ago. Today the German government is finally admitting he was right!

Chancellor Friedrich Merz has officially labeled the decision to shut down Germany’s nuclear plants a 'huge mistake’. pic.twitter.com/yrb6REh0zt
— Mars University (@MarsUniversityX) February 16, 2026

THE WORLD ORDER IS OFFICIALLY DEAD

This shift will touch every single market from equities and bonds to real estate and crypto.

The Munich Security Conference just ended and the verdict is in. The post-1945 era is gone.

I spent the last few hours dissecting the "Under… pic.twitter.com/QkpYYskkzb
— Nonzee (@0xNonceSense) February 16, 2026

The smartest age in life may be 55 to 60 – not in your 20s.

Raw cognitive abilities, such as processing speed and memory, often peak early in life. Athletes typically hit their prime before 30, mathematicians make major breakthroughs by their mid-30s, and chess champions rarely… pic.twitter.com/vk7b0Pb7dM
— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) February 16, 2026

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

Debt Rattle September 1 2025

Sep 012025

September 1, 2025 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:40 am Finance Tagged with: end times, fertility rate, Gavin Newsom, Germany, Lisa Cook, mission creep, Moldova, voter ID, War Party 59 Responses »

Elaine de Kooning Fairfield Porter #1 1954

• Are the End Times Upon Us? (Paul Craig Robets)

• Europe Could ‘Die Out’ – Musk (RT)

• Zelensky Threatens ‘New Deep Strikes’ Into Russia (RT)

• European ‘War Party’ Hindering Ukraine Peace Process – Kremlin (RT)

• Germany Gives Up On Idea Of Sending Troops To Ukraine – Bild (RT)

• The Assassination of One of The Founders Of Zelensky’s Ukraine (Romanenko)

• Someone Killed Victoria Nulands’ Former 2014 Maidan Point of Contact (CTH)

• EU Elites Hijacked Moldova’s Independence (Ibragimov)

• French PM Admits Debt Will Devastate Next Generation (RT)

• Germany Blocks EU Sanctions On Israel (RT)

• Germany Reveals Most Popular Names Among Welfare Recipients (RT)

• Lisa Cook and the Fed’s Mission Creep Into Wokeness (Gasparino)

• Gavin Newsom Comes for Sen. Kennedy in Crime Debate (RS)

• Newsom Is Copying Trump So He Can Run for President (Margolis)

• Intel Chiefs Behind Russiagate Should Be Arrested – Trump (RT)

• Trump Says He Will Issue Executive Order to Require Voter ID (ET)

https://twitter.com/GuntherEagleman/status/1961963545593061825

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1962186488298537147

Moon

New information is coming out about the, "moon landing." pic.twitter.com/2OXKAbTVkh

— Girl patriot (@Girlpatriot1974) August 30, 2025

$2B
https://twitter.com/mcafeenew/status/1961921378354909588

CDC

The real reason for the recent CDC resignations is that the ACIP Subcommittee on COVID 19 vaccines got approval to investigate the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccines, and they knew the gig was up, the truth was about to come out, and they would have to account for their…

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) August 31, 2025

Gates

A major purge is underway at the White House, with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. firing dozens of Bill Gates-connected officials from CDC, HHS, and NIH to dismantle a corrupt biomedical regime influenced by Gates. CDC Director Susan Monarez was dismissed for insubordination after… pic.twitter.com/qxmuTsezcL

— ꪻꫝể ꪻꫝể (@TheThe1776) August 30, 2025

Ladapo

Dr. Ladapo is brilliantly articulate – as usual. https://t.co/6UN7d3wXuh

— Robert W Malone, MD (@RWMaloneMD) August 30, 2025

A bit over the top, perhaps?

• Are the End Times Upon Us? (Paul Craig Robets)

A 23 year old transgender freak fired into a church killing two children and wounding many. The concern expressed by Jacob Frey, mayor of Minneapolis? “The shooting should not be an excuse for people to direct hate at our trans community.” The unexamined question is why did random shootings of strangers appear for the first time in 1966? There was no such thing in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s. At Georgia Tech students had guns in their dorm rooms and fraternity houses. At UVa students had guns and whiskey in their dorm rooms. No one was shot. Today guns are prohibited on campuses, and there are constant shootings that have spread to work places, shopping malls, and churches.

Clearly, something has changed to cause behavior, which my generation never would have considered, to become increasingly common. What is the cause? Is it the endless number of vaccinations? The antidepressants needed? My generation did not have the vaccinations and antidepressants and did not need them. Is it the distancing from God caused by endless liberal attacks on Christianity? Is it the milieu of hatred created by endless denunciations? Is it the lack of restraint and self-control that modern child raising produces? It doesn’t help to understand what has happened to blame guns. Karl Marx would scoff at the reification of inanimate objects by liberals. As long as causes, such as gun control, use the shootings for their agenda, we will not obtain insight into what has produced a 23 year old person who can fire away at children in a church.

The replacement of moral and responsible behavior with irrational murder for no visible purpose desperately needs explanation. Has Satan taken over, thereby removing morality as a constraint on imperfect humans? This is an interesting question. Is it a question of pills, vaccinations, broken homes, the 2nd Amendment, or any other stock explanation, or are we, weakened as we are by the decline in religious belief, faced with the triumph of evil over good? Watching the world’s indifference to the Israeli extermination of the Palestinian people, has Satan decided that now is his time? Has Satan made a good decision? Is there any moral strength anywhere in the world capable of resisting Evil? Where is the effort to abolish nuclear weapons which can abolish Earth? Is the traditional alliance of Israel with Satan taking us into The End Times?

“The replacement fertility rate is generally set at 2.1 children per woman [..] ..this level may be insufficient, pointing to a long-term survival threshold closer to 2.7 children per woman.

• Europe Could ‘Die Out’ – Musk (RT)

Europe could “die out” unless it fixes its demographic problems by boosting birth rates, tech billionaire Elon Musk has warned. In a post on X on Saturday, Musk was responding to statistics from Scotland showing 34% more deaths than births in the first half of 2025. “Unless the birth rate at least gets back to replacement rate, Europe will die out,” he wrote, referring to the average number of children needed per couple for a population to replace itself. The replacement fertility rate is generally set at 2.1 children per woman, accounting for child mortality and near-equal gender ratios at birth. Recent studies, however, suggest that this level may be insufficient, pointing to a long-term survival threshold closer to 2.7 children per woman.

Unless the birth rate at least gets back to replacement rate, Europe will die out https://t.co/0COU5Zj9QM

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2025

According to the UK’s Office for National Statistics, the fertility rate in England and Wales fell to 1.4 in 2024, while Scotland’s stood at 1.3 – both far below replacement levels. In the EU, fertility has been declining for years, reaching a record low of 1.4 live births per woman in 2023. Musk, a vocal advocate for higher birth rates who has fathered at least 14 children and donated millions to fertility research, has often raised the alarm over the demographic decline in Europe. His warnings, however, extend beyond Europe. Musk has cited global demographic data, claiming that civilization “is going to crumble” unless birth rates rise. He previously argued that population collapse due to low fertility “is a much bigger risk to civilization” than climate change.

Either Europe starts having large families or it will keep dying https://t.co/UNX72ZRn98

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 14, 2025

Worldwide, fertility has been falling for over 50 years. UN data shows it stood at around 2.2 births per woman in 2024, down from 5 in the 1970s and 3.3 in the 1990s. Only 45% of countries and areas – home to roughly a third of the global population – reported fertility levels at or above 2.1 last year. Just 13% had fertility rates of 4.0 or higher, mainly in sub-Saharan Africa, Afghanistan, Sudan, and Yemen. Falling birth rates and population decline have also become a pressing issue for Russia, with Rosstat recording just 1.2 million births in 2024 – the lowest since 1999 – reflecting a fertility rate of 1.4.

“Ukraine has long turned into a testing ground for Western weapons. There are more than enough examples.”

• Zelensky Threatens ‘New Deep Strikes’ Into Russia (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has threatened new strikes into Russia, days after claiming that Kiev possessed a brand-new long-range missile capable of reaching Moscow. Zelensky wrote on Telegram that he had been briefed by Ukraine’s commander-in-chief, Aleksandr Syrsky, on the current battlefield situation. “We will continue our active actions exactly as needed to protect Ukraine. Forces and means are prepared. New deep strikes have also been planned,” he said on Sunday, without providing further details. Earlier this month, Zelensky claimed Ukraine had developed the long-range Flamingo missile with a reported range of 3,000 kilometers – which would be enough to reach not only Moscow but also Russian cities beyond the Ural mountains. The Ukrainian leader, however, said that mass production is not expected for the next several months.

British media outlets cast doubts on whether the Flamingo was developed in Ukraine, noting similarities with the FP-5 cruise missile produced by the UK-based Milanion Group and unveiled at an arms expo in Abu Dhabi this year. The UK has also been supportive of Kiev’s long-range strikes, having provided it with Storm Shadow missiles in the past. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova noted that there is “nothing surprising” in the similarities, adding that “Ukraine has long turned into a testing ground for Western weapons. There are more than enough examples.” On Friday, the Kyiv Independent also reported that Ukraine’s National Anti-Corruption Bureau has launched an investigation into Fire Point, the defense firm linked to the development of the Flamingo missile, after reports it misled the government on pricing and deliveries.

Earlier this month the Wall Street Journal reported that the US had blocked Ukraine from carrying out strikes deep inside Russian territory. Throughout the conflict, some of Kiev’s Western backers have been wary of authorizing unrestricted strikes into Russia using Western-supplied weapons, citing concerns over escalation with Moscow. Ukraine has regularly carried out long-range attacks inside Russia, which Moscow says frequently hit civilian areas and critical infrastructure. Russia has retaliated with strikes on Ukrainian military-related facilities and defense enterprises but maintains that it never targets civilians.

“..in stark contrast to the approach pursued” by Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.”

• European ‘War Party’ Hindering Ukraine Peace Process – Kremlin (RT)

The European “war party” is trying to sabotage the diplomatic process launched by the US and Russia to end the Ukraine conflict, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. He added that this approach contradicts the efforts of US President Donald Trump. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron have for months floated the idea of sending a joint military contingent to Ukraine in a so-called peacekeeping capacity if Kiev and Moscow reach a truce or peace deal. Moscow has strongly opposed the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any role. On Sunday, Peskov said the stance of the “European war party” is “in stark contrast to the approach pursued” by Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“The Europeans are hindering the [peace] efforts,” as part of their strategy to “contain” Russia, the Kremlin spokesperson told journalists. He added that certain NATO member states have been encouraging Ukraine to refuse to negotiate with Russia in good faith – a strategy that “will do no good to the Kiev regime.” “Russia is still ready to settle the [conflict] by political-diplomatic means,” Peskov said, but Kiev has to show reciprocity for the hostilities to end. Last weekend, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov argued that European nations “don’t want peace” in Ukraine, citing their reaction to the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska earlier this month.

Last week, speaking to reporters after a follow-up meeting between the US president and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, as well as several European leaders at the White House, Macron insisted that Europe “will need to help Ukraine with boots on the ground.” Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Romania, and Croatia have ruled out taking part in the mission. On Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that a significant proportion of the EU population is “opposed to any deployment that places troops in harm’s way.”

“..Trump’s stance put a halt to Berlin’s discussions about deployment “until further notice.”

• Germany Gives Up On Idea Of Sending Troops To Ukraine – Bild (RT)

Berlin has shelved plans to possibly deploy German soldiers to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire, Bild reported on Sunday, citing government sources. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had earlier signaled openness to Berlin joining a possible peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. The idea had been floated by the so-called “coalition of the willing” – a group of Western states pushing for continued aid to Kiev. The group has proposed deploying NATO troops to monitor a potential future ceasefire with Russia as part of security guarantees for Ukraine, despite Moscow’s consistent rejection of any Western military presence in Ukraine under any guise. Trump, however, said last week that American troops would not be deployed to Ukraine, insisting that the EU should “front load” security guarantees for Kiev, not the US, including with regard to peacekeepers.

According to Bild, Trump’s stance put a halt to Berlin’s discussions about deployment “until further notice.” Sources told the outlet the idea could return “should Trump take action” or once Moscow and Kiev reach a settlement. In an interview with ZDF on Sunday, Merz confirmed the U-turn, saying “nobody is talking about ground troops at this point” and indicating discussions could resume once a ceasefire is in place. Instead, Germany reportedly plans to provide financial security guarantees to Ukraine. Sources claimed Berlin intends for the Bundeswehr to continue training Ukrainian soldiers, expand weapons production in Ukraine with German arms firms, and potentially cover part of Ukrainian soldiers’ salaries after a ceasefire to ensure Kiev maintains sufficient forces.

Kiev has demanded security guarantees from Western backers as a precondition for a peace deal. Moscow has not ruled out such guarantees in principle but rejects efforts made without its participation. It has also opposed any Western troop presence in Ukraine, stressing that NATO’s expansion toward its borders was one of the key causes of the conflict. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Friday that guarantees must be the result of a settlement, not a precondition, and must take into account Russia’s security. She added that any deal should ensure Ukraine’s demilitarization, denazification, neutral and non-nuclear status, and recognition of territorial realities.

“He knew the true sponsors and curators. He knew which political figures, which structures, which financial backers prepared and paid for the bloody upheaval.”

• The Assassination of One of The Founders Of Zelensky’s Ukraine (Romanenko)

All of Ukraine’s political elite will loudly point to Moscow as the hand behind the murder of former parliamentary speaker Andrey Parubiy. They will cry out in public that Russia is to blame, repeating the same narrative of the “Russian trace.” But in private, they all know the truth: it was his own people that came for him.

The idea that Parubiy was eliminated by the authorities themselves, while sounding outrageous to some, is a version that carries weight, even if many prefer not to believe it. Why? Because Parubiy was one of the few men in Ukraine who truly knew how to build a Maidan. He had organized the barricades in 2014, commanded the Maidan “self-defense,” and knew every method of bringing people into the streets and holding them there against state power. His reputation came from exactly this talent. And in today’s Ukraine, the possibility of another Maidan is very real. For those in power, such a possibility is dangerous, and removing the man who could light the match makes a grim kind of sense.

But there is another explanation, one far darker and one in which almost everyone believes, even if few Ukrainians will say so out loud. Parubiy carried too many secrets – and in Ukraine, secrets can be fatal. He knew far too much about the real shooters on the Maidan in February 2014. As “commandant,” he oversaw the units who guarded the square, and he was positioned to see what others could not. He knew what really happened when the snipers opened fire, when the bloodbath claimed lives and forced Yanukovich to flee. He knew names, structures, and the chain of command. That knowledge made him dangerous.

He also knew the truth about Odessa, May 2, 2014 – the day the Trade Union House went up in flames and dozens of anti-Maidan activists died. International monitors called it a massacre, but the state buried accountability. Parubiy, as head of the National Security and Defense Council at the time, was in the middle of it all. He saw who gave the orders, who turned away, who allowed the fire to consume the building. Those responsible never faced justice, and Parubiy carried the story inside his head. He knew the full picture of the early days in Donbass, when provocations, manipulations, and engineered violence pushed Ukraine into a war against its own people. He knew the true sponsors and curators. He knew which political figures, which structures, which financial backers prepared and paid for the bloody upheaval. All of this knowledge made him a threat not to Russia, but to those much closer: the networks who had built their power in those years and who now sit on fragile foundations.

For them, Parubiy, – a close ally of former President Pyotr Poroshenko, beaten by Vladimir Zelensky in 2019 – was no longer an asset. He was a liability. And in the brutal logic of power, liabilities are erased. This is why his assassination looks less like an act of foreign aggression and more like an act of internal housecleaning. It was a calculated decision to tidy up loose ends, to remove a man who could, at any moment, destabilize the whole system by speaking truths that were never meant to surface. His silence was demanded, and silence was achieved.

“Andriy Parubiy knew a lot about western intelligence operations in Ukraine. Andriy Parubiy is dead now. Volodymyr Zelenskyy knows a lot about western intelligence operations in Ukraine.”

• Someone Killed Victoria Nulands’ Former 2014 Maidan Point of Contact (CTH)

Previously Chairman, now serving as a member of the Ukrainian Parliament, Andriy Parubiy was shot several times with a short-barreled firearm, police said. Parubiy died on the spot. The perpetrator, who fled the scene and has not yet been identified, was “thoroughly prepared” according to local authorities. Andriy Parubiy was the primary Ukrainian political activist during Victoria Nuland’s organized Maidan revolution. In common parlance, this assassination might be considered throwing a bag over a potential risk. Remember, CNN is to the State Dept as the Washington Post is to the CIA.

(VIA CNN) – […] Parubiy participated in 2004’s Orange Revolution, where hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians joined in peaceful protest following disputed elections. He was also a prominent figure in the Maidan Revolution, a movement which began in November 2013 after then-President Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign a trade pact with the European Union that had been years in the making, opting instead for closer ties with neighboring Russia. During the revolution, which lasted three months, Parubiy was the head of an enormous tent city established by thousands of protesters in Kyiv’s central Independence Square, known as the Maidan.

He was later the secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council during 2014. In 2019, Parubiy signed a bill to make the use of the Ukrainian language mandatory in certain public sectors, calling it a “historic day.” Long ago, the opposition elements in eastern Ukraine labeled Parubiy a ‘nazi’ and accused him of working in collaboration with U.S. intelligence (CIA).

Andriy Parubiy knew a lot about western intelligence operations in Ukraine. Andriy Parubiy is dead now. Volodymyr Zelenskyy knows a lot about western intelligence operations in Ukraine.

“..it was the Moldovan diaspora in Western Europe that tipped the balance. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Moldovans living in Russia were effectively sidelined..”

• EU Elites Hijacked Moldova’s Independence (Ibragimov)

On August 27, Chisinau turned into a stage for a geopolitical spectacle. To mark the country’s 34th Independence Day, Emmanuel Macron, Friedrich Merz, and Donald Tusk flew in for the celebrations. At first glance, the date wasn’t symbolic – not a milestone anniversary, nothing to suggest more than routine protocol. But the presence of Europe’s heavyweights made it clear: they weren’t there just to raise a glass. Their message was unmistakable – Moldova’s path must remain firmly European, and the door to Moscow must stay shut. The timing was no accident either. In less than a month, Moldovans will vote in parliamentary elections that could decide whether the ruling party manages to hold onto power.

That’s why the visit was less about congratulating the country and more about sending a signal: Brussels stands squarely behind Maia Sandu’s government and is determined to keep a tight grip on the direction of Moldova’s foreign policy. The speeches in Chisinau read less like polite congratulations and more like marching orders. Macron spoke of “friendship, solidarity, and confidence in our shared future.” Tusk declared that “Europe will be stronger with Moldova” and praised the country’s “values and resilience.” Merz, for his part, assured the crowd that “Germany, France, and Poland stand with a free and European Moldova.” Translated from diplomatic niceties, the message was blunt: Brussels sees Moldova as part of its buffer zone – and it’s prepared to squeeze until any attempt to restore ties with Russia becomes political suicide.

All of this is happening against the backdrop of a decisive vote. On September 28, Moldovans head to the polls in parliamentary elections that could reshape the country’s politics for years. The ruling Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) is at real risk of losing its majority. That’s why Independence Day was staged as a dress rehearsal for the campaign: photo ops with European leaders, warnings about “hybrid threats,” and promises of support from Brussels. The goal was clear – to lock the country into a narrative of “Europe or chaos,” leaving no room for pragmatic recalibration or any attempt at balancing ties with Moscow.

Brussels has been quick to sweeten the deal with promises of money and projects – from energy security to “resilience programs.” The sums and instruments are already being touted publicly. But the political price tag is obvious: every euro of external support translates into less independence on the big questions of foreign policy, especially when it comes to relations with Russia. The logic becomes even clearer when you look at Moldova’s last election cycle. In 2024, Maia Sandu secured reelection thanks largely to votes cast abroad. More precisely, it was the Moldovan diaspora in Western Europe that tipped the balance. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of Moldovans living in Russia were effectively sidelined – their access to polling stations and ballots was severely restricted.

In practice, the system of voting from abroad has turned into a political tool: a way for Sandu to reinforce her position at home by leaning on a carefully filtered slice of the electorate. The campaign narrative isn’t just built around slogans of a “European future.” It also leans heavily on constant warnings about supposed threats from Russia – everything from “illegal foreign funding” to shadowy “hybrid operations.” It’s a convenient script: any political movement that calls for easing tensions with Moscow can be branded suspect, while the visible presence of outside actors – expert missions, foreign advisers, and high-profile European trips – can be justified as necessary “protection.” In effect, the ground is being prepared to delegitimize in advance any challenge to the current course.

He’s up for a confidence vote in a week. That works like a truth serum.

• French PM Admits Debt Will Devastate Next Generation (RT)

France has saddled the younger generations with debts they’ll be paying off their entire lives, French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou has said. Paris continuously borrows in the interest of “boomers” and “certain political parties,” he added. On Monday, Bayrou said he urged President Emmanuel Macron to reconvene parliament by September 8 for a confidence vote to gauge support for his €43.8 billion ($50.9 billion) austerity measures plan. The prime minister has long sounded the alarm over the country’s spiraling budget deficit, which hit 5.8% of GDP last year – almost double the EU 3% ceiling. The primary victims of the government debt will be the “youngest French people,” Bayrou said in an interview with French broadcaster TF1 on Wednesday.

“They’re the victims; they’re the ones who will have to pay the debt for the rest of their lives,” he said, adding that Paris is trying to convince them that more borrowing is needed. “All this for the comfort of certain political parties and for the comfort of the so-called boomers.” His proposals to battle France’s $3.98 billion government debt have included scrapping public holidays, slashing public sector jobs, as well as welfare and pensions cuts. The program has been criticized by left-wing parties, who have accused Paris of prioritizing military spending over social welfare. Macron has promised to increase France’s military budget to €64 billion by 2027, citing external threats.

Paris has warned of a potential war scenario within the next five years, naming Russia as one of the principal threats – claims which Moscow has dismissed. Bayrou’s proposed budget has not been well received by the French public, polls suggest. While most French people agree with the prime minister’s alarmism about the national debt, 76% believe his budget will not help, and 82% see it as socially unfair, according to an Elabe survey from Tuesday. Around 81% want a new prime minister to be elected, and 67% called for Macron’s resignation, according to Elabe’s poll. Nearly three-quarters say they want Bayrou to fail in the vote on September 8, which is to be his ninth no-confidence motion.

“.. the bloc has not imposed “a single measure” against Israel, contrasting it with the bloc’s unity in sanctioning Russia..”

• Germany Blocks EU Sanctions On Israel (RT)

Germany has blocked the European Commission’s latest proposal to sanction Israel over the war in Gaza, Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul has said. Israel has faced growing backlash over its conduct in the conflict, accused of allowing almost no aid into the enclave. Several Western states have announced plans to recognize a Palestinian state, and in some cases, scale back military and trade cooperation with Israel. The European Commission last week proposed suspending Israel’s participation in the Horizon Europe research program, cutting off funding for Israeli start-ups in drone technology, cybersecurity, and AI. This was intended to pressure Israel to improve humanitarian aid deliveries, according to a draft resolution.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of an EU meeting in Copenhagen on Saturday, Wadephul said Germany rejected the plan, as it was “not convinced” that curbing Israel’s access to EU research funds would influence its military action. Instead, he noted that Berlin has already restricted the delivery of weapons that can be used in Gaza, suggesting Brussels should focus on similar steps. “I believe this is a very targeted measure, one that is very important and very necessary,” he said. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas acknowledged on Saturday that the bloc is divided on the issue, and that she is “not very optimistic” that ministers will reach an agreement soon, even though it does not require full unanimity. She added that some states want stronger economic pressure.

Denmark, which holds the EU’s rotating presidency, recently signaled support for tougher sanctions, such as suspending trade with Israel. Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares and his Slovenian counterpart, Tanja Fajon, have condemned the EU’s inaction over Gaza. Fajon told Bloomberg this week that the bloc has not imposed “a single measure” against Israel, contrasting it with the bloc’s unity in sanctioning Russia over the Ukraine conflict. The Gaza conflict began in 2023 when Hamas militants attacked Israel, killing around 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages. Since then, Israeli forces have killed more than 61,000 people in the enclave. A UN-backed panel earlier this month declared that there is a famine in northern Gaza, with over half a million people on the brink of starvation.

We know in advance.

• Germany Reveals Most Popular Names Among Welfare Recipients (RT)

‘Mohammed’ and ‘Ahmad’ are among the most common names of welfare recipients in Germany, according to newly revised figures released by the federal government. ‘Olena’, a Ukrainian variant of Helen, is the only female name in the top ten. Germany’s unemployment rate reached 6.4% in August, with the total number of jobless people exceeding 3 million for the first time in a decade. According to Federal Employment Agency data, 5.42 million people were receiving welfare benefits at the end of 2024 – of which 48% were foreigners, compared to 19.6% in 2010. The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party had requested information on the most common first names of recipients to support its argument about the failure of integration.

In June, the Labor Ministry replied that the leading names were ‘Michael’, ‘Andreas’, and ‘Thomas’, followed by ‘Daniel’, ‘Olena’, and ‘Alexander’ – prompting media ridicule of the AfD. However, the initial list did not combine different spellings of names, such as ‘Thomas’ and ‘Tomas’, ‘Mohammed’ and ‘Mohamed’, listing them separately. The revised data placed ‘Mohammed’ – spread across 19 spellings – in first place with nearly 40,000 entries, followed by ‘Michael’ with around 24,600 and ‘Ahmad’ with more than 20,600. ‘Olena’ remained the only female name among the top ten, with around 14,200 entries. Germany is the EU’s top migrant destination and the world’s third-largest refugee-hosting country, according to UN data.

Under former Chancellor Angela Merkel’s open-border policies, more than a million people arrived from Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq during the 2015 migrant influx. In recent years, the country has granted temporary protection to 1.2 million Ukrainians and received 334,000 asylum applications in 2023, nearly a third of the EU total. The migrant crisis has strained housing, public services and finances, contributing to the rise of the AfD, which has recently led national polls as Germany’s most popular political party. The AfD came in second in February’s federal election with 152 seats in the 630-seat Bundestag, but was excluded from coalition talks. Germany’s domestic intelligence agency (BfV) has designated the AfD a “confirmed extremist entity.” While that classification was temporarily suspended, senior officials have continued to seek legal grounds to pursue a formal ban of the party.

“Go back a few years to her messy confirmation battle and you will see how Cook is anything but apolitical.”

• Lisa Cook and the Fed’s Mission Creep Into Wokeness (Gasparino)

Fed Governor Lisa Cook is standing up to Donald Trump, suing to keep her job because she says the president is trumping up a scandal and she’s fighting for Fed independence. Trump has called for Cook’s head for allegedly committing mortgage fraud by signing documents that she had two primary residences. We should let the courts decide that one. But Cook’s notion that she’s standing up for the sanctity of the Fed should be taken with a grain of salt. The Fed has long been distracted by side hustles to its “dual mandate” of price stability within the context of maximum employment. It’s far from an apolitical agency. Even more, Cook’s own appointment by Joe Biden in 2022 is an example of how politics, particularly of the left-wing variety, has been infused into the Fed’s plumbing. In getting rid of Cook, you can make the case that Trump — in his own messy way — is righting the ship.

The markets may be signaling this — despite media talking heads and those of some Fed watchers exploding over Trump’s latest alleged apostasy. The establishment commentariat is arguing that not being able to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell or even Cook except for some on-the-job crime, aka cause — is why people keep buying our debt. The nation’s central bank created by Congress to manage the money supply doesn’t report to the president. It’s not subject to his political whims to juice economic growth at the expense of “King Dollar.” OK, all good points. But stocks and bond yields have barely budged. The stated reasons in a recent Wall Street Journal piece: Traders believe Trump will appoint seasoned pros to fill the jobs of both Cook and his main Fed nemesis, Powell. Yes, but my sources provide a more prescient analysis of the market’s insouciance: Trump is merely putting his MAGA stamp on the independence charade.

Many big investors are unfazed by Trump’s power grab because for years the Fed has been straying from its mandate — constantly intervening in the economy by playing with the money supply when it isn’t needed and most recently becoming woke. Lisa Cook’s nomination in 2022, subsequent confirmation by the then Democrat-controlled and woke-obsessed Senate is part of the proof. Don’t believe me? Here’s what Larry Summers, Bill Clinton s former treasury secretary, former Harvard president and one of the most important economic minds on monetary policy said in 2021 about the Fed’s mission-creep: “We have a generation of central bankers who are defining themselves by their wokeness. They’re defining themselves by how socially concerned they are. They re defining themselves how concerned they are about the environment… business ethics.

In 2022, the Fed developed a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Strategic Plan to reflect the Federal Reserve Boar’s strategic initiative on diversity, equity, and inclusion, which is a shared responsibility of all Board employees. Now tell me exactly how DEI, which the Supreme Court says is discriminatory and common sense tells you erodes the nation’s meritocracy, helps the Fed figure out if it’s stoking inflation as it did just a few years ago during Joe Biden’s reign of error? Or maybe I should be directing that question to Lisa Cook. Her lawyer argued Friday before a federal judge that her firing by Trump is “unprecedented and illegal” in that it exceeds the president’s authority over an independent, nonpolitical agency. Go back a few years to her messy confirmation battle and you will see how Cook is anything but apolitical.

Yes, she has a Ph.D. in econ, from Berkeley no less, and was a longtime academic. She is the first African-American woman to serve as a Fed governor, which should be celebrated. But during the hearings we discovered that her areas of interest in economics, based on her publishing record, are dominated by stuff like how lynchings hindered the economic growth of black Americans. There is a place for such research at the university — though you gotta ask yourself why we need an economist to explain something so fundamentally obvious. Look into Cook’s résumé and you see this is an economist who seems more obsessed with being a social-justice warrior than weighing the vicissitudes of M2 and how it impacts price stability.

“..he’s put the funk into dysfunction.”

• Gavin Newsom Comes for Sen. Kennedy in Crime Debate (RS)

One of the tactics Gavin Newsom has used over the last several weeks to try and get the upper hand in the crime debate is using misleading and, in some cases, false crime data impressions in an attempt to make the case that red states have bigger crime issues than California, while proclaiming crime in California’s biggest blue cities is allegedly down by double digits. A frequent target for Newsom and his Baghdad Bob School of Communications graduates has been Louisiana, not just because it’s a red state but also because it’s home to House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA). In a recent interview with left-wing YouTuber Brian Tyler Cohen, for instance, Newsom said, “I think [President Trump] should start with Shreveport, Louisiana, and Speaker Johnson’s district, that has six-plus times the per capita murder rate of Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco. What about the carnage, Mr. President, in Shreveport? Why aren’t you protecting the folks there?”

As usual, however, Newsom – and his handlers – were way off the mark. The vast majority of Shreveport is in Rep. Cleo Fields’ district. He’s a Democrat. As we’ve also reported, Sen John Kennedy (R-LA) has had a lot to say about Newsom’s seeming “conversion” to crimefighter, something Kennedy instinctively understands has everything to do with the Trump Effect, where Newsom has been shamed at the national level by the POTUS into taking action. “Now you don’t have to be a senior at Caltech to know that [Newsom’s law enforcement surge is] in response to the Trump administration’s threat to send in federal law enforcement officials,” Kennedy stated Friday during a Fox News segment. “But look, I’ll take it, if that’s what it takes to get Gov. Newsom to stop being a princess, I’ll take that, too.”

Sen John Kennedy: Newsom Put The Funk Into Dysfunction

"I've watched Governor Newsom for years and to quote one of my favorite columnists, he's put the funk into dysfunction. Every year that he's been governor, crime and violence has gotten worse in California. Why? Because… pic.twitter.com/pUFbamtRcd

— Mr Producer (@RichSementa) August 29, 2025

Newsom, in turn, filed a hurt feelings report over being called a princess, responding to a tweet from Kennedy by claiming without evidence that, “We’ve been doing this work for years. Perhaps you should take a page out of our book. Your state’s homicide rate is 380% higher than California’s.” Naturally, Kennedy – who has previously referred to Newsom as a “weenie” – has responded accordingly to Newsom’s attacks on his state as only he can: ‘I welcome help. I welcome federal help. I welcome more state help. I welcome local help. Come on down. Look, I’ve watched Gov. Newsom for years, and to quote one of my favorite columnists, he’s put the funk into dysfunction. Every year that he’s been governor, crime and violence has gotten worse in California. Why? Because Gov. Newsom is a member of the socialist wing of his party. Because Gov. Newsom has refused to get up off his ice-cold, lazy butt and do something about it.

Because Gov. Newsom thinks that talking about crime – he’s only doing it under pressure – is racist, because he thinks that cops are a bigger problem than criminals. But I wanna give him credit, maybe he’s had a conversion, but he’s doing the right thing by sending in California state police. And, you know, even a blind chicken finds a mealworm now and then.”

“..he’s thrown at least $24 billion at homelessness programs with nothing to show for it..”

• Newsom Is Copying Trump So He Can Run for President (Margolis)

California Governor Gavin Newsom clearly has his eye on a 2028 presidential run, and apparently he thinks the way to get there is by copying former President Donald Trump’s tough-on-crime playbook. His latest move? Deploying California Highway Patrol crime-suppression teams across major cities including Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Diego, as well as the Bay Area. These teams are meant to back up local law enforcement in high-crime neighborhoods, targeting repeat offenders, illegal guns, and narcotics. Last year, similar teams racked up over 9,000 arrests, recovered nearly 6,000 stolen vehicles, and seized hundreds of firearms—so on paper, it looks like results. At the same time, Newsom is trying to sell himself as the more “people-focused” alternative to Trump, whom he is accusing of “militarizing American cities” by sending in National Guard troops without state approval.

He’s ridiculed Trump’s so-called “authoritarian tendencies,” and even challenged him to deploy troops in Republican-led states such as Louisiana and Mississippi, where, Newsom claims, homicide rates are far higher than in California. The hypocrisy is obvious, and the White House didn’t let Newsom off easy, mocking him for copying Trump’s crime agenda after previously blasting similar tactics. Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson called it “making crime a partisan issue,” but added, “the more Democrats follow Trump’s lead on cracking down on crime, the better it is for Americans”. Democrats are soft on crime by instinct. It’s their default mode—coddling criminals, ignoring law-abiding citizens, and pretending the problem doesn’t exist. But when political ambition requires it, suddenly they’re “tough on crime,” putting on a performance to save their own skin, rather than actually protecting communities.

That’s what Newsom is doing now. He’s trying to clean up his own backyard before his planned presidential run. I guess we’re just supposed to ignore the fact that he’s done nothing to reduce crime or fix the homeless problem in his state. In fact, he’s thrown at least $24 billion at homelessness programs with nothing to show for it, and violent crime remains stubbornly high in cities such as Oakland and San Bernardino. Poverty, drugs, and understaffed police departments continue to plague the state, yet Newsom points to flashy statistics and temporary crackdowns as proof he’s taking action on behalf of his constituents; in reality, he’s just trying to position himself better to seek higher office. The crime-suppression teams are reactive, not strategic. They’re an attempt to mimic Trump’s methods without actually addressing California’s systemic failures.

And while Newsom lectures Trump on federal troops, his own record shows massive public funds disappearing into bureaucratic black holes without fixing the underlying problems. Meanwhile, he clings to political theater—highlighting crime in GOP-led states to distract from California’s own mess and painting Trump as an overbearing authoritarian. It’s a tough sell when your own state’s cities are in trouble and your solutions are superficial, and meant to help himself, not his state. Newsom wants to run on law and order, but his tenure is marked by fiscal recklessness and half-measures. If he were serious about fighting crime, he would have acted sooner and smarter. At the end of the day, Newsom’s crime teams are just a showpiece, a way to borrow Trump’s playbook while pretending to oppose him. For voters paying attention, the question is simple: can a governor who can’t account for billions spent on homelessness—or fix his state’s crime problems—seriously claim he’s ready to lead the country? The stunt is in motion, but Newsom can’t cover up California’s failures with a gimmick.

“I didn’t want to see that. I didn’t want the, you know, the wife of a president, to go to jail, but she was stone cold guilty of things..,”

• Intel Chiefs Behind Russiagate Should Be Arrested – Trump (RT)

US President Donald Trump has said he would not mind seeing ex-FBI Director James Comey and ex-CIA Director John Brennan handcuffed and arrested live on TV due to their alleged role in the Russiagate hoax. Trump made the remarks in an interview with the Daily Caller published on Saturday, stating that it would “not bother [him] at all” if the two former intel chiefs end up in custody. “What they did is a disgrace. They cheated, they lied, they did so many bad things, evil things that were so bad for the country, and because they did something to me that should have never been done, nobody thought they’d ever do that,” Trump stated. “They should be [arrested] because they’re crooked and they got caught,” he added.

The situation with Brennan and Comey is different from what the US administration had on its hands with Hillary Clinton, Trump suggested, apparently referring to the email controversy dating back to her tenure as the US secretary of state. “Hillary’s a good example. We had Hillary cold. I didn’t want to see that. I didn’t want the, you know, the wife of a president, to go to jail, but she was stone cold guilty of things,” Trump stated. The Trump administration launched a probe into the Russiagate hoax shortly after the US president assumed the post for the second time early this year. The investigation has been spearheaded by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who has repeatedly pledged to get to the bottom of what she described as a “treasonous conspiracy” to delegitimize Trump’s 2016 election victory and a “years-long coup.”

Since mid-July, Gabbard has released multiple documents that allegedly expose a coordinated effort by senior Obama-era officials, as well as structures linked to billionaire George Soros, to falsely accuse Trump of colluding with Russia. Moscow has consistently denied any interference in the 2016 election, with Russian officials describing the allegations as a product of partisan infighting. The Russiagate scandal heavily damaged relations between Moscow and Washington, resulting in sanctions, asset seizures, and a further erosion of diplomatic engagement.

“The Executive has interpreted the law for centuries—this is nothing new, and certainly nothing constitutionally objectionable.”

• Trump Says He Will Issue Executive Order to Require Voter ID (ET)

President Donald Trump said on Aug. 30 that he has decided to issue an executive order to request that federal elections require the presentation of voter ID in order to cast a ballot. “Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. No exceptions!” Trump wrote on a post on Truth Social. “I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!!” The president did not give a timeline for his order. The midterm elections will be held on Nov. 3, 2026. States have authority over how to hold their elections as long as they comply with federal prohibitions. The president also repeated his opposition to the widespread adoption of mail-in ballots and the use of electronic voting systems, although this time he didn’t say they would be the subject of any executive action. “Also, No Mail-In Voting, Except For Those That Are Very Ill, And The Far Away Military. Use paper ballots only!!!” he said.

Earlier this month, Trump had pledged to issue an executive order ahead of the 2026 midterm elections to end the use of mail-in ballots and return to the use of paper ballots instead of voting machines. In March, Trump issued an executive order to require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for registering to vote in federal elections. The order was to enforce that states meet the citizenship requirement for federal elections for requiring government-issued ID in their voter registration forms. The order also sought to overhaul election rules related to other aspects of election law enforcement, such as voting deadlines, electronic voting machine security, and foreign interference in U.S. elections. The president said the changes were intended to safeguard the vote against what he describes as “fraud, errors, or suspicion.”

Legal groups filed suit, claiming that the order exceeded presidential authority, and a federal judge agreed in part with the plaintiffs, blocking implementation of much of the executive order while allowing a directive to tighten mail-in ballot deadlines around the country to remain in forceAfter the Supreme Court issued a judgment in late June in an unrelated case, limiting the judicial branch from granting nationwide injunctions, the federal judge in the elections case amended her injunction in mid-July in the case to apply only to the 19 Democratic-led states that filed the complaint. The Trump administration has appealed the ruling with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, arguing that the enforcement sought in the executive order doesn’t alter existing federal statutes or violate the Constitution. “The Executive has interpreted the law for centuries—this is nothing new, and certainly nothing constitutionally objectionable.”

But, in any event, the President’s interpretation of those laws accords with their text, purpose, and history, and he has the authority to interpret for the Executive Branch what they require,” government lawyers argued. Trump also pushed for the passage of the SAVE Act, a major overhaul of federal election law that was passed by the House but floundered in the Senate, where it would have required support from Democratic lawmakers to pass. At the state level, Texas Republicans, at Trump’s urging, recently passed legislation to redraw their state’s congressional maps to increase Republicans’ hold on the U.S. House delegation by five seats. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed the bill into law on Aug. 29. California lawmakers have responded with a push to increase Democrats’ hold over California’s U.S. House delegation.

Inosculation

‘The thinner tree was cut years ago and the big one has been holding and feeding it since then. They "wake up" together in the spring and "go to sleep" together in the autumn’

Inosculation is a natural phenomenon in which parts of two different trees, commonly but not… pic.twitter.com/eB1lv7GGcT

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) August 31, 2025

Cinema
https://twitter.com/DudespostingWs/status/1962010458795508091

Time

The Paradox of Time according to Aristotlepic.twitter.com/u8IBV77izo

— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 31, 2025

Michelangelo

Michelangelo was 33 years old when he started painting the Sistine Chapel ceiling in 1508

It took him 4 years to complete

pic.twitter.com/IjSz8drm9F

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) August 31, 2025

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

Debt Rattle August 19 2025

Aug 192025

August 19, 2025 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 9:40 am Finance Tagged with: Civil War, clown car, mail-in voting, Mary McCord, NATO, new world order, oil pipeline, Social Security, Trump, War Party 50 Responses »

Edward Hopper Folly Beach, Charleston, South Carolina 1929

• Russia Did NOT Invade Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)

• The EU and Kiev Are Losing, and Trump Is My Witness (Romanenko)

• Ukraine’s Army Should Face No Size Limits – Macron (RT)

• The Old World Order Cracked In Alaska (Bordachev)

• An Offer He Can’t Refuse (James Howard Kunstler)

• Red Carpet For A New World Order: What Really Went Down In Alaska (Poletaev)

• Ukraine Strikes Key Oil Pipeline To EU – Hungary (RT)

• Attack on Hungary Pipeline Shows Ukraine Will Stop at Nothing- Zakharova (Sp.)

• Zelensky’s Main Argument Against Peace Is a Lie (Romanenko)

• 5 Takeaways From Trump’s Meeting With Zelenskyy And European Leaders (NYT)

• Ukraine Wants Europe To Pay $100bn For Weapons Deal With US – FT (RT)

• Ed Martin: Russia Hoax to Blow Up, Schiff and Biden’s DOJ Next (Margolis)

• Trump Is About to Go Nuclear Against Mail-in Voting (Margolis)

• Mary McCord (Sundance)

• British Army Colonel: CIVIL WAR Is Coming (MN)

• How Trump Broke the Democratic Party (Margolis)

• Trump Vows Social Security Will Thrive for Another ‘90 Years’ (RCW)

Zelenksy arrives in Washington with his new best friends. pic.twitter.com/CNXKY8wGfX

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 18, 2025

Dubinsky
https://twitter.com/Dubinsky_pro/status/1957103940979368025

"I have my official military gear kit ready, and you ?" pic.twitter.com/8cXC7eHkOO

— Harvey Wallbanger (@HarveyWall8angR) August 18, 2025

$1 trillion
https://twitter.com/FFT1776/status/1957100979557396609

MoscowLondon

Moscow and London. Who knows where dictatorship is. pic.twitter.com/CzAnanmdwJ

— RadioGenoa (@RadioGenoa) August 17, 2025

Speech

I remember vividly the first time I saw this speech. Three thoughts raced through my head: 1. Since when does Trump talk like this?? 2. How is this the same man I’ve learned to hate?? 3. How the F have I not seen this before????? Kept rewinding, rewatching pic.twitter.com/3aqrIVdz5Z

— Good Questioner (@goodquestioner) October 10, 2020

Plot twist! pic.twitter.com/amkEkzHhqI

— DD Geopolitics (@DD_Geopolitics) August 18, 2025

Macgregor – at 16 min he discusses “security guarantees“

One step up and two steps back.

On Friday, Trump was well on his way towards peace. On Monday, he walked all of it back. He seems to be trying to make everybody happy, which is hardly ever a good idea, but certainly not if they want diametrically opposed things. Putin genuinely wants peace, provided it comes under his conditions, but Zelensky and the EU leaders are the war party if ever there was one. They, too, want peace, but only after Russia has been thoroughly defeated. and since they have no army to do it with, they want Trump to do it for them. It’s all just one false flag away.

We can perhaps give him the befit of the doubt, but the clown car spectacle in the White House yesterday doesn’t promise much good. Under the nomer of ‘security guarantees’ for Ukraine, they were between ‘acts’, even discussing US troops in Ukraine, on top of a very large Ukrainian army. What they were not discussing is peace.

Pretty good history lesson from Paul Craig Roberts. Judging from how deeply the false story has been embedded in people’s minds, much needed.

“The restoration of Russian citizenship is completely legal under the international rules of self-determination. There is no effort on the part of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to return to Ukraine.”

• Russia Did NOT Invade Ukraine (Paul Craig Roberts)

A totally transparent blatant lie has been turned into a truth throughout the Western world. The lie is that Russia invaded Ukraine. I will provide the factual history which is easy to verify. When Washington overthrew the Ukrainian government in 2014 and installed a puppet, Washington relied on the Banderites to push the government into hostility with the Russian settled areas of Ukraine, areas such as Crimea and Donbas, that originally were part of Russia. Whether or not the Banderites, followers of Stepan Bandera are neo-Nazis, they are certainly hostile to Russians. The conflict in Ukraine began in 2014 with street assaults on Russians in Donbas and government attempts to ban the use of the Russian language and other prohibitions placed on the Russian areas. These street assaults soon grew into artillery attacks on Donbas towns and occupation of Donbas territory by Ukrainian militias sporting Nazi insignia.

To protect themselves, Donbas formed into two independent republics–Luhansk and Donetsk–and formed paramilitaries to defend themselves. In 2014 Donetsk and Luhansk voted overwhelmingly to be reabsorbed into Russia like Crimea, but Putin refused. Instead, Putin relied on the Minsk Agreement, which Ukraine and the independent republics signed, and which Germany and France were supposed to enforce. The agreement, sponsored by Russia, kept Donbas in Ukraine but provided some autonomy, such as independent police and courts to protect the rights of the Russian inhabitants. Putin naively relied on the Minsk Agreement, which the chancellor of Germany and president of France later said was used to deceive Putin while the US built and equipped a large Ukrainian army.

By late 2021 this army was prepared to invade Donbas, much of which was already under Ukrainian occupation, and forcibly reincorporate Donbas into Ukraine without any autonomy. Faced with the abuse and possible slaughter of Russian people, Putin and his foreign minister Lavrov tried during December 2021-February 2022 to obtain a mutual security agreement with the West that would exclude Ukraine from NATO membership and contribute to mutual security by normalizing relations between Russia and the West. The Biden regime, NATO, and the EU flatly refused. The conflict followed this refusal. Seeing the writing on the wall and unable to avoid it, Russia gave official recognization to the Donbas republics. This allowed Donetsk and Luhansk to request Russia to come to their aid, which Putin did at the last minute eight years too late. As Russia was invited into Donbas, Russia did not even invade Donbas, much less Ukraine.

Putin designated the Russian intervention a “special military operation” limited to clearing Ukrainian troops from Russian areas. Seven months into the military intervention on September 30, 2022, Russia reincorporated the Russian areas of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson into Russia. The ground fighting has been limited to clearing Ukrainian troops from territory that is again part of Russia. Ask yourselves how and why did the truth get replaced by a lie? The answer is that those who profit from war provide the war propaganda. Now ask why does it matter? The answer is that propaganda is a barrier to understanding and to a peaceful diplomatic solution to a conflict that can easily spin out of control into a wider war.

The propaganda that the evil-dictator-war-criminal-Putin’s invasion of Ukraine is the first step in reconstruction [of] the Soviet Empire places restraints on Trump and Putin’s ability to put East-West relations on a less dangerous footing. Already the Western whore media is screaming that Trump is selling out Ukraine, that Trump is selling out Europe, that Trump is putty in Putin’s hands. These and other such ignorant slogans will be used by the Zionist neoconservatives and US military/security complex to drive wedges between Trump and his supporters. Americans have been indoctrinated to think of Russia as the enemy for 75 years. The belief is institutionalized.

Progress toward peaceful relations requires truthful reporting and correction of established beliefs that are false. Can this be achieved when the well-placed neoconservative supporters of US hegemony are defending their interest, and the military/security complex is determined to protect its power and profit? Trump can expect little help from the media. Naive Russians should not get carried away with their hopes for an accommodation with the West. Powerful barriers are in the way of Russian hopes, and Russians have no means of removing the barriers. It is doubtful that Trump does.

Now ask yourselves a final question? Why is it PCR who is making the case for common sense and for truth? Why isn’t it the US foreign policy community, the Kremlin, the Chinese, the Russian media, the Western media, the German government, the British government, the government of India? Why aren’t Trump’s supporters making the case? I am only one voice easily shouted down as a “Putin agent/dupe” by the Washington Post, CNN, Fox News, NPR, BBC, MSNBC, NY Times, Wall Street Journal, The Guardian, and the rest of the whore media and a plethora of internet sites sponsored by war-mongers. The normalization of relations between the West and Russia will take many voices. Where are those voices?

Note: The whores at the BBC and the rest of the presstitute media incorrectly report that Russia’s restoration of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to Russian citizenship is illegal. The restoration of Russian citizenship is completely legal under the international rules of self-determination. There is no effort on the part of Crimea, Donbas, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson to return to Ukraine.

“Kiev and the EU are pushing for a reinforced Ukrainian military, possible NATO deployment on Ukrainian soil or even eventual NATO accession.”

• The EU and Kiev Are Losing, and Trump Is My Witness (Romanenko)

Monday’s White House summit featuring US President Donald Trump, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, and several senior EU figures ended without any grand announcements. Yet beneath the surface, a high-stakes diplomatic contest is unfolding over the Washington’s role in the Ukraine conflict. The lack of decisive outcomes suggests that the real work is happening behind the scenes. Trump’s behavior – in particular his decision not to echo Kiev’s or Brussels’s messaging in the post-meeting briefings – is a signal. He is asserting his control over the narrative, reflecting that he remains unpersuaded by EU and Ukrainian arguments for continued Western entanglement in the conflict.

A strategic tug-of-war
The summit and the diplomatic moves surrounding it are a tug-of-war, with Moscow’s goal being to remove Washington’s involvement in the conflict, while Brussel’s and Kiev’s is to keep it anchored in their corner. The absence of new sanctions or pressure on Russia following last Friday’s Putin-Trump summit in Alaska suggests Moscow is gaining momentum. Trump has even shifted from demanding a ceasefire to advocating direct peace talks – a position more congenial to Moscow. EU leaders and Zelensky came to Washington to reinforce Trump’s alignment. The want to persuade Trump: strengthen sanctions, maintain arms shipments, ensure Ukraine has a security architecture they want.

Thus far, though, their pull seems to be struggling. Trump, from the outset, appeared to put the EU and Ukraine on the defensive, signaling that their influence is limited. The backdrop is critical: just days before, Trump hosted Putin in Anchorage, and that summit paved the way for more flexible diplomacy that sidesteps EU-defined preconditions. European leaders arriving at the White House now are playing catch-up – trying to steer a conversation already impacted by Trump’s shift.

The security guarantees question
Everything hinges on security guarantees for Ukraine – a deeply contested issue. Moscow is adamant that any meaningful guarantee depends on Ukrainian neutrality and demilitarization. In contrast, Kiev and the EU are pushing for a reinforced Ukrainian military, possible NATO deployment on Ukrainian soil or even eventual NATO accession. These efforts by the Europeans appear desperate, even naïve – given that Russia is slowly but steadily winning the war on the ground. And as Russia makes military gains, Kiev’s and Brussels’ wiggle room in the negotiations shrinks. That said, their attempts shouldn’t be dismissed outright. The shape of the peace deal slow-cooked in Washington will determine Ukraine’s fate – and by extension, much of Europe’s future security structure.

Moscow, meanwhile, remains unperturbed. After the meeting with Zelensky and the Europeans, Trump held a 40-minute phone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Judging by the information released about the substance of the call, Trump made no demands and Putin offered no concessions. They talked about continuing direct Russia-Ukraine talks. They also discussed “elevating” the level of the talks, and according to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who was present at Monday’s meeting, direct talks between Putin and Zelensky could take place within two weeks. It is clear that the Kremlin remains steadfast and poised to consider setting the terms while it holds all the military cards.

In the end, the Washington summit may have lacked ceremony and a spectacular outcome, but it was loaded with geopolitical subtext: a contest over whether the US remains a supporter to Ukraine or begins to shift back toward a more transactional, realist posture. The EU, recognizing its diminishing leverage, is trying to reclaim the narrative as the battleground, at least for now, is clearly tilting against it.

He knows exactly how Russia sees this. Calling for it regardless comes very close to a declaration of war.

• Ukraine’s Army Should Face No Size Limits – Macron (RT)

A potential peace deal must not place limits on the size of Ukraine’s military, French President Emmanuel Macron has said, rejecting Russia’s demands. Earlier this year, Moscow reaffirmed that peace terms must include Ukraine’s neutrality and legally binding restrictions on the size of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Kiev has dismissed the demand as unacceptable. Macron made his remarks following a meeting he attended in Washington on Monday with Vladimir Zelensky, several other European leaders and US President Donald Trump. He said European countries should take the lead in providing security guarantees for Ukraine and equipping its army.

“The first security guarantee is a robust Ukrainian army capable of repelling any attempted attack,” Macron told reporters following the negotiations. He added that the Ukrainian army should consist of “several hundred thousand men” and face “no limitations on its size,” according to Le Figaro. The Ukrainian army has struggled to replenish its ranks during the ongoing mobilization campaign, as Russia has steadily gained ground. Ukraine has long urged the West to provide guarantees similar to NATO’s collective defense, as an alternative to full membership in the alliance, which the US has rejected.

Trump said on Monday that Russian President Vladimir Putin had agreed to security guarantees for Kiev, without elaborating. The two leaders met in Alaska on Friday, with both sides describing the summit as an important step toward peace between Russia and Ukraine. Moscow has repeatedly said it would not tolerate any Western troops in Ukraine, even under the guise of peacekeepers, and insists that Kiev must abandon its plans to join NATO. Putin has also warned that Ukraine could use a potential ceasefire to regroup and rearm.

“..after Anchorage, the Western refusal to acknowledge Russian interests is no longer an insurmountable barrier.”

• The Old World Order Cracked In Alaska (Bordachev)

The meeting between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump in Alaska may go down as one of Russia’s most significant diplomatic wins. It was secured through years of military sacrifice, political perseverance, and relentless effort. Yet it is also a transition – a step into a new stage of the struggle for sovereign states in a fractured world. The most consequential result of Anchorage was the quiet burial of the West’s old formula: isolating and “strategically defeating” Russia. For decades, any state refusing to fall in line risked ostracism. That system cracked in Alaska. Not because of American goodwill – there is no such thing in international politics – but because of pressure. Pressure from Russia, from the so-called “global majority,” and from the turmoil tearing at America itself. Trump’s administration has shifted its approach, and the summit proved it.

The outcome was clear: American capabilities diminished, Russian ones enhanced. This, in turn, frees space for other nations to act more independently, even if they will not admit their debt to Moscow.Some talk of a “renaissance” in relations between Moscow and Washington. But there is nothing to restore. The ties that existed before 2022 were shaped by the USSR’s defeat in the Cold War, and cannot be recreated. Instead, dialogue will stabilize on new terms. The core will be recognition that Russia cannot be excluded from the international system. This simple fact means disputes between Moscow and the West, however sharp, are solvable in principle. Competition will remain fierce, especially over Ukraine. But after Anchorage, the Western refusal to acknowledge Russian interests is no longer an insurmountable barrier.

For Trump, Alaska delivered something equally valuable: a domestic win. In the US, relations with Russia have become central to the internal political struggle. One camp insists on preserving an ideological monopoly at all costs. The other argues for flexibility. Trump belongs to the latter – and needed a visible success to show his critics. The face-to-face meeting with Putin provided it. He strengthened his position at home, showing that he can engage Washington directly while sidestepping Western Europe. Foreign policy has always mattered more in Russia, domestic politics more in America. Each man walked away with what he most needed.

“The USA can only mediate and propose terms. Ukraine needs help formulating terms that are not preposterous.”

• An Offer He Can’t Refuse (James Howard Kunstler)

Volodymyr Zelenskyy is dropping in at the White House today so that Mr. Trump can read him the riot act. It’s that simple. Somewhere to or from Alaska, Mr. Trump concluded that a ceasefire would not work, for the excellent reason that seven previous ceasefires in Ukraine failed, and only reinforced distrust and disappointment between the warring parties. Instead, the goal is a peace settlement, an end to the war. The USA and Russia cannot make peace in Ukraine because the war is between Ukraine and Russia. The USA can only mediate and propose terms. Ukraine needs help formulating terms that are not preposterous. Russia’s terms have been clear and precise for years, most particularly: no NATO for Ukraine. What part of that is hard to understand? The EU wants missile bases on Russia’s border. It wants to draw Ukraine into its sphere of influence. Ukraine has been in Russia’s sphere of influence since. . . forever.

The US helped start this conflict in 2014, when Mr. Obama was in charge. It was always a cynical operation, in concert with the cynics of the EU. To put it as plainly as possible, Mr. Trump has called it off, recognizing the foolish futility of the scheme. But the EU players persist maniacally, even though they don’t have the money or the armaments to keep it up, and are otherwise jointly committing slow suicide of their own societies. Anyway, Ukraine is exhausted. Ukraine has lost. Sheer intransigence could keep it going a while longer, but then Russia will sweep west with more pointless bloodshed. The argument is over. Territorial realities must be faced. Agreements must be made.

For the moment, Mr. Zelenskyy is the one who must be brought to agreement. His position as leader of Ukraine is, shall we say, squishy. His term as elected president of Ukraine ended in May 2024, and he only continues to occupy his position under martial law, self-declared. The Russians recognize his leadership as a contingency, because there is nobody else just now. Mr. Trump will be discussing Mr. Zelenskyy’s fate with him today in the White House. (It’s a little like a scene from an Ingmar Bergman movie, don’t you agree?)

There are many ways for this to go. Mr. Z can simply refuse a peace settlement, politely or otherwise. (War continues for no good reason.) He made noises to that effect on Sunday. Or, he can pretend to go along and then flip to some opposite stance, as he has done before. Mr. Z remains an actor of the prima donna variety. He can pretend to parlay in Washington, and then direct his return flight to some country other than Ukraine and seek asylum there, leaving his position vacant and inviting chaos in Kiev. Or. . . he can just play it straight and face the territorial realities.

Namely, that 1) Russia occupies most of the eastern frontier provinces at issue and intends to keep them, since they are inhabited by speakers of Russian who, remember, Mr. Z outlawed some years ago, and who were subject to relentless artillery and missile attacks prior to February, 2022, which prompted Russia’s Special Military Operation. . . that 2) Crimea belongs to Russia. . . that 3) Ukraine will not join NATO. . . that 4) Ukraine will hold new elections ASAP. . . and that 5) Ukraine will substantially disarm. . . . Surely, I left some lesser details out, but that’s most of the meat on the table.

Mr. Z is probably aware that he holds zip in the way of leverage. He is probably thinking (as is everyone else paying attention to this psychodrama) that he will be extremely lucky to stay alive in the aftermath of this fiasco, whatever shadowy corner of the world he might flee to, or how many billions of purloined US dollars he’s managed to stash in the usual places that permit cash-stashing. Staying in Ukraine must be out of the question, considering the damage he’s done to his own people, and the animus it has generated. Who knows, maybe Mr. Trump has reserved a nice little villa for Mr. Z in West Palm, where the president can keep tabs on him? He could learn golf and open a dinner theater.

“Pressuring Putin would take effort. Pressuring Europe and Ukraine would take effort. Even walking away would take effort – and the US can’t manage that.”

• Red Carpet For A New World Order: What Really Went Down In Alaska (Poletaev)

The meeting in Anchorage opened with a choreographed spectacle unlike anything the world had seen before. Two massive airships rolled onto the tarmac one after the other. Two presidents emerged at the exact same moment. They began walking toward each other. Donald Trump paused on the red carpet, waiting as Vladimir Putin covered his part of the distance. The world held its breath. It must have felt something like July 1969, when millions watched Neil Armstrong step onto the lunar surface. A few more seconds, one small step – and then, the historic handshake. A giant leap for mankind. The staging seemed to promise that history would be made that very day. Hundreds of journalists from around the globe had gathered at Elmendorf-Richardson Air Force Base, anticipating dramatic announcements.

Instead, the ending fell flat. After closed-door talks, Trump and Putin appeared before the cameras to declare there was “no deal yet” – only an agreement to keep talking. The expanded session and working lunch were scrapped. Putin laid flowers at a cemetery for Soviet World War II pilots and headed home. So, what exactly was that? For Trump, the peace process boils down to optics. He wants the same kind of photo-op he just staged with the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia: Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky shaking hands under his divine glow, the self-anointed peacemaker adding another jewel to his crown. The Kremlin sees it differently. Between the two largest nuclear powers, dialogue must be on an equal footing. A Putin-Zelensky meeting can only come as the result of terms worked out directly between Putin and Trump – terms Zelensky would have no choice but to implement.

That is the central landmine under today’s US-Russian dialogue. For Putin’s delegation, the task wasn’t to put on a show but to achieve some real movement beneath the surface. On the eve of Anchorage, I wrote: “What does Trump want? A ceasefire, and a meeting between Putin and Zelensky. What must Putin do? Ensure both happen on his conditions. Those conditions are clear: Ukrainian withdrawal from Donbass. The question is whether Trump signs on.” If the leaks are to be believed, the Russians at least nudged Trump closer to their position. He now seems willing to test whether he can pressure Ukraine and Europe into accepting Putin’s terms. That’s what the coming weeks will revolve around. By that measure, the Russian delegation achieved its goals – vital for the peace process, but impossible to sell to the public. No shiny photo.

So why doesn’t Trump simply bow out? The answer is simple: he can’t. He’s stuck in the groove he inherited from his predecessor, Joe Biden, and climbing out isn’t easy. Under Biden, Washington was the engine driving the war. Under Trump, America is just dead weight, lumbering forward on inertia. Pressuring Putin would take effort. Pressuring Europe and Ukraine would take effort. Even walking away would take effort – and the US can’t manage that. All America can do now is drift with the current: trickle in weapons and intelligence, without strategy or purpose, because that’s the path of least resistance. Trump hopes the war will somehow resolve itself without him having to deal with it. If we stick with analogies, America under Trump is a massive iron weight on a chain. Russia on one side, Europe and Ukraine on the other, all trying to swing it in their favor.

In Anchorage, Moscow won the round. Europe and Ukraine will bargain, but sooner or later they’ll have to swallow the loss of Donbass – just as they already swallowed the loss of the ’91 borders, the “no talks with Putin” stance, the Zelensky “peace plan,” and plenty more. Europe and Ukraine are prepared to give up much, as long as one thing remains: Western – above all, American – security guarantees to keep the Kiev regime alive. That’s the next big debate. But the reality hasn’t changed. Guarantees exist only if Putin agrees. And he will agree only if Kiev’s government is replaced with one loyal to Moscow. In official language: demilitarization and denazification. These conditions were written into the Istanbul agreements as far back as spring 2022

“..the Ukraine conflict is “not our war” and that “as long as we [Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government] are in charge, Hungary will stay out of it.”

• Ukraine Strikes Key Oil Pipeline To EU – Hungary (RT)

Russian oil supply to Hungary has been halted after Ukraine targeted the key Druzhba pipeline system, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said. Moscow has informed Budapest that Russian experts are working to restore an “essential” transformer station targeted by a Ukrainnian strike, Szijjarto said. Druzhba is one of the world’s longest networks, transporting crude some 4,000km from Russia and Kazakhstan to refineries in the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Szijjarto wrote in a post on X on Monday that “this latest strike against our energy security is outrageous and unacceptable.”

It is not yet clear when deliveries of oil through the pipeline could resume, he added. The diplomat reiterated that the Ukraine conflict is “not our war” and that “as long as we [Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government] are in charge, Hungary will stay out of it.” Unlike most other EU capitals, which supported Kiev after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Budapest took a neutral stance and refused to supply weapons to the government of Vladimir Zelensky. It also consistently called for peace and criticized Western sanctions against Russia as ineffective and more harmful to those who impose them.

Ukraine has repeatedly targeted Russian energy infrastructure throughout the conflict, including the Druzhba system and the TurkStream pipeline, which supplies natural gas to Turkish customers and several European countries, including Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Greece. The previous attack on Druzhba occurred last Wednesday, with Kiev confirming that it had sent drones to strike a key distribution station in Bryansk Region, western Russia.Moscow has condemned Ukrainian attacks on civilian energy infrastructure many times as acts of terrorism.

While Zelensky is doing”peace talks”, Ukraine planned attacks on the Crimean bridge (another one), energy infrastructure, nuclear plants, and pipelines to European countries. With friends like this…

• Attack on Hungary Pipeline Shows Ukraine Will Stop at Nothing- Zakharova (Sp.)

The Russian Foreign Ministry said on Monday, commenting on the Ukrainian attack on an oil pipeline leading to Hungary, that Ukraine will stop at nothing. “For all these years, Russia has been warning the ideologues – those from the Obama-Maidan club – who’ve been fostering the Kiev regime, that this immoral and bloodthirsty monster will never stop and, like a filthy contagion, will spread throughout the world. In Africa, they have already committed terrorist attacks. They’ve popped up in the Middle East. They’ve sucked Central Asian citizens into terrorism.

They’ve taken control of the illegal arms trade in Europe. [And] they’ve perfected black market organ transplants for Western clients. Bankovaya will stop at nothing now,” Maria Zakharova wrote on Telegram. Earlier in the day, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto said that oil supplies to Hungary had been suspended indefinitely due to another attack by Ukraine on an oil pipeline.

“..the very Constitution that Zelensky has suddenly invoked as sacred… has long been on hold. And that’s not an accusation – it’s his own admission.”

“Ukraine’s democratic institutions haven’t just been “paused” – they’ve been systematically dismantled under the banner of wartime necessity.”

• Zelensky’s Main Argument Against Peace Is a Lie (Romanenko)

Commenting on the outcome of the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky declared: “The Constitution of Ukraine does not allow the surrender of territories or the trading of land.” On paper, that sounds noble. The message is clear: Kiev won’t let others decide Ukraine’s fate behind its back. But take a closer look, and this principled stance starts to look less like constitutional fidelity – and more like political theater. Because the very Constitution that Zelensky has suddenly invoked as sacred… has long been on hold. And that’s not an accusation – it’s his own admission. Back in December 2022, while addressing Ukraine’s ambassadors, Zelensky quipped: “All the rights guaranteed by the Constitution – are on pause.”

The context? He was joking about how diplomats don’t get holidays. But the phrase stuck. Because it turned out to be more than a joke – it became official policy. Since then, Ukraine’s democratic institutions haven’t just been “paused” – they’ve been systematically dismantled under the banner of wartime necessity. National elections? Canceled indefinitely. Not just presidential or parliamentary – even local races were suspended, eliminating the public’s ability to hold any level of government accountable. Zelensky’s current term, once set to expire, has been extended without a vote – and without a clear end date. Opposition media? Silenced or outlawed. Dozens of TV channels and online outlets critical of the government were shut down or merged into a state-approved broadcasting platform. Independent journalism in Ukraine now walks a legal tightrope – with one foot over prison.

Religious freedom? Eroded beyond recognition. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church, seen as too closely linked to Moscow, has been harassed, evicted from centuries-old monasteries, and branded a security threat. Worshippers face criminal charges for sermons, symbols, or even prayers deemed “unpatriotic.” Military conscription? Brutal and indiscriminate. Young men are pulled off the streets by recruiters, sometimes beaten or coerced into enlisting. Videos of forced mobilizations circulate regularly – and are met with silence or spin from the authorities. Political dissent? Treated as treason. Opposition politicians have been arrested, exiled, or sanctioned without trial. Entire parties have been banned. Ukraine’s Security Council now acts as judge and jury – blacklisting citizens, freezing assets, and deciding guilt without a courtroom.

Rights didn’t just get paused. They were overwritten. To be fair, this erosion didn’t start with Zelensky. It began back in 2014 when President Yanukovich was ousted in a manner that skipped any constitutional procedure. The army was then deployed – for the first time in post-Soviet history – against a domestic protest. The rule of law quickly gave way to rule by necessity. Courts rubber-stamped sanctions lists. Parliament became a formality. The Constitution was increasingly treated as a suggestion, not a boundary. Zelensky merely completed what others started. Under his watch, Ukraine is no longer governed by its Constitution – it’s governed by presidential decree. The Constitution hasn’t been a check on executive power for years. Instead, it’s become a stage prop: Shelved when inconvenient. Quoted when useful.

That’s precisely what happened after the Trump–Putin summit. As it became clear that the fate of the conflict was being discussed without Kiev at the table, Zelensky rushed to invoke constitutional law – not to restore legality, but to cling to legitimacy.

Whaddaya know? New York Times (through a Greek paper).

• 5 Takeaways From Trump’s Meeting With Zelenskyy And European Leaders (NYT)

President Donald Trump met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders at the White House on Monday, in a cordial but inconclusive push to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. Much of the meeting focused on what security guarantees the European nations and the United States would provide Ukraine if Zelenskyy agreed to a deal to end the fighting. Trump also spoke to Russian President Vladimir Putin to begin setting up a possible direct meeting between Zelenskyy and the Russian leader, though it was not clear when or even whether such a session would come about. Here are five takeaways from the meeting.

The leaders presented a relatively united front
Three days after Trump gave Putin a literal red carpet welcome at their meeting in Alaska and abandoned several key positions he had staked out beforehand, he presided over a discussion with America’s traditional allies in which the participants largely emphasized common ground. Some differences broke through. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany argued for a ceasefire to be put in place before further negotiations with Russia, but was gently rebuffed by Trump. And President Emmanuel Macron of France suggested he was skeptical that Putin was dealing in good faith. “I am not convinced that President Putin also wants peace,” he told reporters at a news conference. But there were no blowups of the sort that ended a previous visit by Zelenskyy to the White House. All the participants appeared to agree with a plan to arrange direct talks between Zelenskyy and Putin even while other issues are worked out, such as the precise nature of the security guarantees for Ukraine and what if any territory Ukraine might be willing to cede.

Trump spoke only in vague terms about security guarantees for Ukraine
Trump said on social media that the meetings were fruitful and that the leaders discussed “security guarantees for Ukraine, which Guarantees would be provided by the various European countries, with a coordination with the United States.” Earlier, addressing reporters in the Oval Office, Trump was asked whether the United States would send U.S. troops to Ukraine as part of any peacekeeping effort. Trump did not answer the question directly, but said that the United States would “help them out.” “We’ll be involved,” Trump said. The European leaders pressed Trump on providing a security guarantee similar to NATO’s Article 5, meaning that an attack on Ukraine would be considered an attack on all NATO countries. “We will give them very good protection and very good security,” Trump said. When asked what kind of security guarantees he wanted, Zelenskyy said: “Everything.”

Trump engaged in some shuttle diplomacy with Putin
President Joe Biden once referred to Putin as a “murderous dictator,” but Trump has long held a more positive view of the Russian president. On Monday, Trump continued to portray Putin as genuinely interested in finding a way to end the war he had started. At one point, Trump broke off his session with the European leaders in the East Room of the White House to call the Russian leader. Afterward, Trump brought Zelenskyy and the European leaders into the Oval Office to describe his discussion with Putin, according to President Alexander Stubb of Finland.

Russia and Ukraine will work on a possible Putin-Zelenskyy meeting
Trump said in a social media post that he had called Putin to begin arranging a meeting between Zelenskyy and Putin. He said he would then seek to meet with both leaders in a trilateral session. But it was unclear if all the parties were on board. Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign policy aide, said in a statement that Putin and Trump had a “frank and very constructive” phone conversation about the meeting with Zelenskyy and the European leaders at the White House. In diplomatic shorthand, “frank” often signals that the two sides did not fully agree. The statement said the Russian and American leaders had agreed to appoint more senior negotiators for direct talks between Russia and Ukraine, but did not mention whether Putin would participate. While Putin has not refused outright to meet with Zelenskyy, he has made it clear that he does not consider the Ukrainian president either legitimate or his equal.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine would buy $90 billion of American arms
Trump has said he does not want to provide more aid to Ukraine, but is willing to sell arms to help the Ukrainians fend off the Russian assault. Zelenskyy expressed particular interest Monday in acquiring more Patriot air-defense systems to help minimize the damage from relentless Russian missile attacks. Zelenskyy told reporters Monday that as part of any security guarantees, Ukraine would buy $90 billion in American weapons through Europe, and that the United States would buy drones from Ukraine. He said that a formal agreement still had to be arranged. But a deal of that scale would be a substantial step toward assuring that Ukrainian forces continue fighting against Russia and have a robust defense in place should a peace deal be reached.

And they’ll pay it, with money they and their citizens don’t have.

• Ukraine Wants Europe To Pay $100bn For Weapons Deal With US – FT (RT)

Ukraine has proposed that its European backers spend $100 billion providing it with American weapons, the Financial Times reported. Kiev continues to seek security guarantees from Washington. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky and the heads of several Western European states held talks with US President Donald Trump in Washington on Monday to discuss the ongoing conflict and diplomatic attempts to resolve it. Trump, who has repeatedly questioned the previous administration’s unconditional aid to Kiev, announced last month that Washington’s NATO allies would effectively pay for the US-made weapons being sent to Ukraine. In addition to the weapons procurement proposal, Ukraine is preparing a $50 billion deal to produce drones domestically, FT reported, citing four people familiar with the matter and a document Kiev reportedly shared with the US.

Although the document contains limited details, FT said Ukraine intends to purchase at least 10 Patriot air defense missile systems. Ukraine’s European supporters have struggled to ramp up production to meet Kiev’s needs, as Ukrainian forces have steadily been losing ground to the Russian army. After a one-on-one meeting in Alaska on Friday, Trump claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin was ready to agree to security guarantees for Ukraine, though he did not provide specifics. Ukraine has previously urged the West to provide security guarantees equivalent to NATO’s collective defense, while several European states have offered to deploy peacekeepers. Russia, however, has stressed that it will not tolerate any Western troops in Ukraine.

“..director of the Department of Justice Weaponization Working Group..”

• Ed Martin: Russia Hoax to Blow Up, Schiff and Biden’s DOJ Next (Margolis)

Ed Martin, the director of the Department of Justice Weaponization Working Group, joined Maria Bartiromo on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” for an explosive interview about ongoing investigations into government abuse of power. Martin confirmed that his office is reviewing criminal referrals involving Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), New York Attorney General Letitia James, and matters tied to the Russia hoax and January 6 investigations. Bartiromo opened by asking Martin to assess “a decade of dirty tricks” against Donald Trump. Martin agreed, saying the DOJ’s Weaponization Working Group, launched under Attorney General Pam Bondi, is tasked with uncovering the truth. “We’ve got more stuff going on, a lot of it we can’t talk about because of the nature of it, but it’s going like crazy,” he revealed.

He credited Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard with declassifying materials tied to the Russia hoax and forwarding them as a criminal referral. “What we have in the Department of Justice now is a Weaponization Working Group and the backing of our leadership to go and find this stuff,” Martin explained. He said his team can trace the origins of the hoax precisely. “We know now the birthday of the Russia hoax. It’s Dec. 8, 2016 where the Obama administration, including Obama, said, ‘Don’t put the truth out; lie, and ask the media to help us,’ and The Washington Post and others jumped right in.” Martin confirmed allegations go beyond Schiff’s role in pushing false collusion claims. “There’s a referral from Bill Pulte about a mortgage fraud, about Adam Schiff. That’s publicly discussed. His own lawyers have been out there. Now there’s more on Adam Schiff, and all we’re gonna do again is get to the facts of this and use all the tools that we have in our system.”

Martin stressed that if wrongdoing is uncovered, Schiff would face accountability. Martin drew a stark picture of Biden’s Justice Department targeting everyday Americans. “Joe Biden’s Justice Department actively targeted American citizens, Catholics who went to Mass, parents who went to school boards,” he said. “Carter Page was destroyed by the Russia hoax, and we’re sitting around and pretending it’s okay.” Martin added that those involved in orchestrating the hoax, including Obama officials in a December 2016 Situation Room meeting, must face consequences: “It wasn’t really bad. It needs to be held accountable in every way we can.” Martin confirmed he had personally visited James’ Brooklyn property after a referral raised questions. “One of the referrals is about that property that she has. It’s a very prominent neighborhood in Brooklyn, and I wanted to lay eyes on it,” he said. “If you’re prosecuting something, you’re careful.”

Martin declined to give specifics but hinted at grand jury activity: “When you get a criminal referral, one of the tools you have is a grand jury, and I’ll leave it to you to infer what I mean.” The conversation then turned to January 6, where Martin said the DOJ’s investigation revealed widespread government overreach. “They basically turned government on to make the hoax work,” Martin told Bartiromo. “The FBI and others were putting American citizens on terrorism watch lists, they were auditing their IRS tax returns, they were targeting the American people. They didn’t do this to the terrorists after 9/11, and they were doing it to American citizens.” Martin also alleged misconduct by the January 6 Committee itself: “Of course [they destroyed evidence]. We’re all in that too, and trust me, a lot of people did not get a pardon that were involved in the select committee,You w and they ought to be keeping an eye on their mailbox, because there’s a lot to be asked about.”

High time.

• Trump Is About to Go Nuclear Against Mail-in Voting (Margolis)

President Donald Trump has been warning for years that mail-in ballots and voting machines are riddled with vulnerabilities that invite fraud and undermine trust in elections. We’ve discussed these vulnerabilities here at PJ Media extensively, and now Trump is taking action on them. On Monday morning, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he will issue an executive order to put an end to mail-in ballots before the 2026 midterms and restore “honesty and integrity” to America’s elections. In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump announced, “I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.”

He argued that such machines cost “Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.” Trump said the United States stands alone in continuing to use widespread mail-in voting. “We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED,” he wrote. The president made clear that he intends to act quickly, pledging to use executive authority to move the plan forward. “WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,” Trump said.

He also challenged the notion that states hold full control over election administration. “Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do,” Trump wrote.President Donald Trump has been warning for years that mail-in ballots and voting machines are riddled with vulnerabilities that invite fraud and undermine trust in elections. We’ve discussed these vulnerabilities here at PJ Media extensively, and now Trump is taking action on them. On Monday morning, President Trump announced on Truth Social that he will issue an executive order to put an end to mail-in ballots before the 2026 midterms and restore “honesty and integrity” to America’s elections.

In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump announced, “I am going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS, and also, while we’re at it, Highly ‘Inaccurate,’ Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.” He argued that such machines cost “Ten Times more than accurate and sophisticated Watermark Paper, which is faster, and leaves NO DOUBT, at the end of the evening, as to who WON, and who LOST, the Election.” Trump said the United States stands alone in continuing to use widespread mail-in voting. “We are now the only Country in the World that uses Mail-In Voting. All others gave it up because of the MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD ENCOUNTERED,” he wrote. The president made clear that he intends to act quickly, pledging to use executive authority to move the plan forward.

“WE WILL BEGIN THIS EFFORT, WHICH WILL BE STRONGLY OPPOSED BY THE DEMOCRATS BECAUSE THEY CHEAT AT LEVELS NEVER SEEN BEFORE, by signing an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 Midterm Elections,” Trump said. He also challenged the notion that states hold full control over election administration. “Remember, the States are merely an ‘agent’ for the Federal Government in counting and tabulating the votes. They must do what the Federal Government, as represented by the President of the United States, tells them, FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY, to do,” Trump wrote. Trump reiterated that elections cannot be trusted under the current system. “ELECTIONS CAN NEVER BE HONEST WITH MAIL IN BALLOTS/VOTING, and everybody, IN PARTICULAR THE DEMOCRATS, KNOWS THIS,” he declared.

He then vowed that he would not back down. “I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS,” he said, calling mail-in voting a “HOAX” and voting machines “a complete and total disaster.” He ended his post with an urgent warning about the stakes. “THE MAIL-IN BALLOT HOAX, USING VOTING MACHINES THAT ARE A COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISASTER, MUST END, NOW!!! REMEMBER, WITHOUT FAIR AND HONEST ELECTIONS, AND STRONG AND POWERFUL BORDERS, YOU DON’T HAVE EVEN A SEMBLANCE OF A COUNTRY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!!!” Trump concluded, signing off as “DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

X thread.

• Mary McCord (Sundance)

1/ To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key corrupt and unlawful DC functionary, consider what we can document.

• McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign. Oct. ’16

• McCord created the Logan Act claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House. Feb ’17

• McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler on Impeachment Committee. ’18

• McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson. ’18

• McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create. ’19

• McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review. ’19

• McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed. ’21

• McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia. ’21

• McCord was working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump. ’22

• McCord is now coordinating a Lawfare attack process against Donald Trump in term #2.

• McCord testified that AG Pam Bondi must recuse herself from investigating McCord. ’25

• Joe Biden pardoned Mary McCord. ’25

“..almost every plausible way forward from here involves some kind of violence in my view.”

• British Army Colonel: CIVIL WAR Is Coming (MN)

A retired British Army Colonel is warning that he believes a civil war in the country is now inevitable because politicians are unwilling to take meaningful actions to fix societal collapse. Colonel Richard Kemp, who has served on the Joint Intelligence Committee and the Cabinet Office crisis centre COBRA, urges that an alliance “of the hard left and Islamist extremists” will clash with broadly conservative British people and that it will lead to widespread prolonged unrest. Kemp suggests that “together with other causes,” these Islamist leftists will “come together to threaten the cohesion and the culture, the entire culture and political existence of the West.” Kemp, who fought counter insurgency in Northern Ireland, served in the Gulf war, Bosnia, and commanded in Afghanistan, asserts that the agitators are “fostered by,” and “funded to a large extent, by our international enemies like Russia, China, Iran, and other countries as well.”

In an interview with podcaster Conor Tomlinson, Kemp remarks that politicians in the UK are “in a state of bewilderment, they’re like rabbits in headlights,” and that while they understand how the unrest is being fomented, they are unable or unwilling to put a stop to it. Kemp says of political leaders that their “horizon is four years,” and “They want to keep a state of equilibrium for that time, they want to do what they can to make sure they win the next election.” “They don’t want to take the radical sort of action that might be necessary to address these sorts of problems,” the Colonel stresses, highlighting mass migration as one major issue. “There’s only so much that I think people can take of that, and they’ve been very quiet up until now, the people in the UK have not really raised their voices against this, or in a very limited way only. But the more it develops, and it is going to develop more and more, the more unrest we are going to see,” Kemp emphasises.

He adds, “they have no option. I’m not encouraging or supporting this, but I think the people will feel they have no option than to take action into their own hands rather than rely on political leaders who are doing nothing, in their eyes.” “I think there is every likelihood, I don’t know what the timeframe is, but I would go so far as to not just predict civil unrest, but civil war in the UK in the coming years if this situation continues which I believe it will,” he urges. “I’d hate to be right on this, but I believe that I know there is no political solution to the situation Britain faces today,” Kemp further declares, adding “When I say there is no solution, I don’t mean there actually isn’t a solution, but there is no solution that any of our politicians are willing to take… because they are afraid of doing anything significant.”

As we’ve previously highlighted, these views are shared by London King’s College war professor Dr David Betz, who believes the UK is already “past the tipping point,” for near future civil war. Betz stated earlier this year, “There isn’t anything they can do, it’s baked in. We’re already past the tipping point, is my estimation… we are past the point at which there is a political offramp. We are past the point at which normal politics is able to solve the problem… almost every plausible way forward from here involves some kind of violence in my view.” Kemp’s interviewer Conor Tomlinson notes that Colonel Kemp has never even heard of Professor Betz and arrived at the same conclusion completely independently, Which “makes his well-informed warnings all the more alarming.”

They broke themselves. No help needed.

• How Trump Broke the Democratic Party (Margolis)

President Trump has had a very productive second term, but according to Victor Davis Hanson, Trump’s biggest accomplishment isn’t legislation; it’s that he shattered the Democratic Party’s façade—and left it flailing. “Donald Trump’s greatest legacy, he broke the Democratic Party and he turned it. … He exposed it for what it was,” Hanson explained in an interview. “It was a bicoastal elite party with a bunch of billionaires who spend lavishly, and a bunch of subsidized poor, and a professional class that feels frustrated.” Hanson described the party’s urban base as young, well-paid professionals struggling in sky-high-cost blue cities. “That’s what the Mamdani constituency is. Frustrated, young prof—white professionals,” he said. Meanwhile, he argued, Democrats have abandoned the working class, along with what he called “muscular classes”—Hispanic and black males, and working-class white voters.

Trump, Hanson pointed out, didn’t just survive this shift—he thrived. “If you look at 2016, ’20, and ‘24, Donald Trump’s white vote is pretty constant,” he said. Despite losing the popular vote in 2016 and 2020, Trump won both the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2024 with the same base. Hanson credited this to Trump picking up women, young voters, and 55% of Hispanic males, along with roughly 25% of black males and 10–15% of Asian males. “So how could that be if he was supposed to be a racist according to the Democrats?” Hanson asked. He explained it’s the Democrats’ condescending approach to voters. “Basically, this is a caricature, but the Democratic attitude toward a black truck driver or a Mexican American electrician was something like this: ‘Now, you don’t know what’s good for you… They’re going to be good for you. I don’t care what you say about your schools being swamps, crime going up. Remember that.’”

He highlighted how the party lectures Americans on everything from gender policies to energy prices. “‘Men have a right to transition, and they are now women, and they’re gonna compete in your daughter’s sports.’ And ‘You don’t know what’s good for you because you’re too ignorant, but I will represent you.’ ‘I’m a black, uh, woman with a PhD.’ ‘I’m a Hispanic woman’ that’s, uh, your congresswoman.’ ‘I am your white liberal Chuck Schumer or Nancy Pel— and I will tell you what is good for you. Got it?’” Hanson called out Barack Obama’s infamous talk with black Democratic activists as a perfect example of this elitism. “‘You think Donald Trump’s good or something.’ ‘You’ve gotta get out there and support Harris.’ ‘You’re suffering basically from Marxist false consciousness. And I, and as an elite, know what’s good for you and I will tell you. Now, go do it,’” Hanson paraphrased.

He reserved particular scorn for former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, whose policies he described as symbolic rather than practical. “Everything about him represents what I just said. Sanctimonious, self-righteous, talk down. I don’t think California is suffering from not enough freeways or it’s too crowded. It’s suffering from racist legacies of clover leaves, and I’m going to make non-racist clover,” Hanson said. Hanson summed up the party’s attitude with a single biting phrase: “It’s a Karen scold.” By treating voters like children and lecturing them on everything from energy prices to social norms, Hanson argued, the Democrats have made themselves easy prey for Trump—a truth the left can’t seem to accept.

“..one of the most significant pieces of legislation ever signed into law,”

• Trump Vows Social Security Will Thrive for Another ‘90 Years’ (RCW)

Nearly a century removed, the Republican president heralded his Democratic predecessor for “one of the most significant pieces of legislation ever signed into law,” the bill that created Social Security. The program turned 90 this month. Without reform, its 100th anniversary is not guaranteed. President Trump still heralded FDR for the program, created at the height of the Great Depression, and vowed in the Oval Office to preserve and improve it “for 90 years and beyond.” The president said this was his “sacred pledge to our seniors.” Had he not returned to the White House, Trump boasted, “Social Security was going to be destroyed.”

And true to his word, Trump has not meddled with senior benefits. His marquee legislation has, in fact, reduced their tax burden by making Social Security benefits tax-free. But the actuarial tables are less rosy than the president put on in front of the cameras. According to new estimates from the program’s chief actuary, Karen Glenn, Social Security will not make it to its 100th birthday as things stand. Instead, the trust fund will be insolvent in just seven years. Money was expected to run out by the first quarter of 2033, but after the One Big Beautiful Bill became law and made benefits tax-free, that forecast was moved up slightly to the fourth quarter of 2032.

At that point, according to analysis by the Congressional Research Service, the federal government would have three options at the point: increase taxes, decrease benefits, or a combination of the two. Trump, who will have joined the ranks of former presidents by then, seemed unconcerned with those predictions. “You keep hearing stories that ‘in six years, seven years, Social Security will be gone,’” he told reporters, “and it will be if the Democrats ever get involved because they don’t know what they’re doing.” So long as his party is in control, he promised, “it’s going to be around a long time with us.”

RFK

RFK Jr just exposed that 36,000+ doctors had their Medicare payments manipulated to push childhood vaccines.

This isn’t medicine — it’s bribery.

Big Pharma & government turned doctors into sales reps.

The corruption is staggering.pic.twitter.com/gxnBOtZUX8

— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) August 18, 2025

Climate

Donald Trump: "One of the most urgent tasks… is to decisively defeat the climate hysteria hoax."

"The radical left's fearmongering about climate and our future is… destroying America's economy, weakening our society, and eviscerating our middle class."

"We have to defeat… pic.twitter.com/PvsBanruTs

— Wide Awake Media (@wideawake_media) August 17, 2025

Rosita

Scientists at the Max Planck Institute have discovered two “interstellar tunnels” connecting our solar system to distant stars.

Using data from the eROSITA X-ray telescope, they found the Sun sits within a 300-light-year low-density bubble from which these hot channels… pic.twitter.com/vJUH4YpYsj

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) August 18, 2025

Bloom

An eucalyptus in bloompic.twitter.com/ID5wvFCHiM

— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 17, 2025

Life

What we call lifepic.twitter.com/gMiqSldUuv

— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 18, 2025

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

Debt Rattle August 16 2025

Aug 162025

August 16, 2025 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 10:17 am Finance Tagged with: Alaska, breakthrough, epic tantrum, grand reset, Grok, India, peace, Putin, summit, tariffs, Trump, War Party, Zelensky 47 Responses »

Edward Hopper Tables for ladies 1930

• Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)

• Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)

• Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)

• Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)

• Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)

• Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)

• Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)

• ‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)

• Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

• Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)

• A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)

• Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)

• The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)

• Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)

• Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)

• US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)

• US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)

• EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

https://twitter.com/TheRicanMemes/status/1956191505934069769

Loon wing

Unless you have the IQ of a meat thermometer, you can see the split in the Democratic Party.

Nobody pays attention to what Presidents Obama or Clinton, Sen. Schumer, or former Speaker Pelosi say anymore.

The real leaders are Zohran Mamdani, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, and Sen. Sanders. pic.twitter.com/bCd8DIOimf

— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) August 14, 2025

Wray
https://twitter.com/Real_RobN/status/1956065246138990940

Kash

KASH: “We found a room locked away in the Hoover Building that contained burn bags … We didn't find one. We found seven … We found hard drives from our predecessors and prior FBI leadership … The list goes on from Russiagate.”pic.twitter.com/evS0U4wukq

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) August 15, 2025

DC
https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1956167053649567935

275

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??

Democrats and the media repeatedly said no illegals were on social security, now Donald Trump says THEY HAVE REMOVED A QUARTER OF A MILLION ILLEGALS FROM SOCIAL SECURITY SO FAR????

250,000 illegals DRAWING OUR SOCIAL SECURITY

pic.twitter.com/BXDMo43tsT

— Wall Street Apes (@WallStreetApes) August 14, 2025

Turley

It’s funny. How do you summarize this summit? It’s like there was no tangible “big breakthrough”, but at the same time everything about it was a giant breakthrough.

“..CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage..”

• Putin & Trump Find Common Ground as West’s War Party Shut Out (Sp.)

Talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump took place at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson near Anchorage, Alaska. Russia acknowledged positive, constructive dialogue between the sides, while Donald Trump hailed significant progress toward a Ukraine settlement. The Putin-Trump meeting shows the West “gambled on an easy victory over Russia and lost,” Mikael Valtersson, a Swedish Armed Forces veteran, told Sputnik. Both Russia and America have signalled satisfaction with the summit as a step forward towards a real peaceful solution of the Ukraine conflict, he noted. “Those that wanted more isolation and sanctions against Russia, if Russia didn’t agree to Western demands, didn’t have their way,” the former defence politician and chief of staff with Sweden Democrats emphasized.

The “Western war party” had hoped for new harsh sanctions on Russia and those trading with it, but instead what can be seen is improving relations between Russia and the US, as well as a continued peace process. After Donald Trump talks with his European allies and Ukraine, they will be faced with a choice, Valtersson said. They can either support the peace process by accepting the realities on the ground and legitimate interests of Russia, or reject it. If they choose the latter, they will isolate themselves from not only the majority of the world, but especially from the US. “Hopefully the cooler heads in Ukraine and Europe will realize that it’s better to follow the US and accept reality, than continue a lost war,” Valtersson concluded.

Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump’s reunion made clear they’d missed the bond from years past, psychiatrist Dr. Carole Lieberman told Sputnik. “When President Putin and President Trump approached each other… their body language showed a very open and warm receptiveness,” the Beverly Hills best-selling author said. The two leaders shook hands multiple times, touched each other’s arms, and smiled—a clear signal they’d missed the connection they had during Trump’s first presidency. Lieberman noted the direct eye contact, standing close marked an “auspicious beginning that foretold a positive meeting.” Even after three hours of serious talks, their joint press conference carried the same energy. Both turned slightly toward one another, as if to emphasize unity. “They gave the impression that they were facing the press together, on the same team,” Lieberman observed.

“..not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up..”

• Trump Pushes Peace Over Ceasefire After Putin Meeting (RT)

The Ukraine conflict should be ended through a permanent agreement rather than a mere ceasefire, US President Donald Trump has said, following his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump said his almost three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage “went very well,” adding that it was “a great and very successful day.” He confirmed that he had discussed the summit with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, several EU leaders, and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte.

“It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,” Trump said. The US president also confirmed that he and Zelensky would hold talks on Monday, adding that “if all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.”

“..plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader..”

• Western Media In Frenzy Over Putin-Trump Summit – Moscow (RT)

Western media have erupted in hysteria over US President Donald Trump’s cordial welcome for his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska on Friday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said. Zakharova weighed in on the three-hour negotiations in Anchorage that brought Putin to US soil for the first time in more than a decade. The Russian leader was greeted at the airport with a red carpet and a flyover of US fighter jets. He and Trump then rode together in the US president’s limousine to the summit venue. While the sides did not announce any deal on Ukraine, Putin described the talks as constructive, with Trump calling the meeting “warm” and suggesting that Moscow and Washington “are pretty close” to settling the Ukraine conflict.

Zakharova noted that Western media had plunged into “frenzy bordering on complete madness” over the honors given to the Russian leader. “For three years they spoke of Russia’s isolation, and today they saw a red carpet rolled out to meet the Russian president in the US,” she said. Western media is attempting to frame the Alaska summit as a diplomatic win for Moscow. The Washington Post wrote that “the warmth of the welcome sent shock through Ukraine and Europe” while pointing to a stark contrast with the reception of Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky at the White House in February, when Trump accused the Ukrainian leader of disrespect, ingratitude over US aid, and of “gambling with World War III.”

https://twitter.com/RT_India_news/status/1956604838650970291?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1956604838650970291%7Ctwgr%5E96fd5db1e5dafa98554807c55448efd1c8b51955%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Frussia%2F623047-western-media-frenzy-trump-putin%2F

Sky News correspondent Ivor Bennett, a former RT reporter, voiced surprise that Putin was first to speak at the media conference “as if he was the host rather than Donald Trump.” Another Sky News reporter had suggested prior to the talks that Putin would “use his KGB-trained powers of deception and seduction” on his US counterpart. Bloomberg reported that “by inviting the Russian president onto American soil and giving him an audience, Trump had already delivered a diplomatic win” for a seemingly isolated leader. The agency also published a separate piece headlined “US-Russia Summit Shows How Little Europe Matters in Trumpworld”, referencing the fact that no EU leaders were invited to the summit. Politico ran the headline “Putin’s Alaska triumph,” while CNN said: “Putin’s isolation ended when his plane landed in Anchorage,” adding, the Russian president “[is] back in from the cold.”

“There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon..”

• Putin-Trump Summit Went Much Better than Expected — Pepe Escobar (Sp.)

There are few details about what exactly was discussed in the meeting, but Russian officials have made it clear that they’re pleased with how it went, says veteran geopolitical analyst, Pepe Escobar. There were even some indications that a serious US-Russia reset could be on the horizon. Even according to President Trump himself, they came to agreement on several important points and only a few are left. So this implies. serious discussions not only about Ukraine, a possible resolution in Ukraine, and of course we we have no idea about the terms and the parameters, but a reset, a serious reset of US-Russia relations. [..] The Russian delegation featured Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov, and RDIF head Kirill Dmitriev. The US delegation included senior diplomatic and security officials.

He would have to give up Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye. That would be the end of him.

• Zelensky Should ‘Make A Deal’ – Trump (RT)

Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky should “make the deal” to settle Kiev’s conflict with Moscow, US President Donald Trump has said following three-hour talks in Anchorage with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, their first summit since Helsinki in 2018. In an interview with Fox News on Friday, Trump reflected on “a very warm meeting,” adding that the sides are “pretty close” to resolving the conflict. He stressed that Kiev should be on board with the push for peace, for it to have any chance of success. When asked what advice he would give Zelensky, Trump replied: “Make the deal”, adding that he believes that Putin “wants to see it done.”

“It’s really up to President Zelensky to get it done. And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit,” the US president added. Trump said that he was ready to mediate direct talks between Putin and Zelensky. “If they’d like, I’ll be at that next meeting… Not that I want to be there, but I want to make sure it gets done. And we have a pretty good chance of getting it done.” Both leaders described the meeting as productive, although no agreement on Ukraine was announced. Putin earlier did not rule out direct talks with Zelensky, but stressed that it must be preceded by significant progress on settling the conflict.

Moscow has also voiced concerns about Zelensky’s right to sign any binding agreements, given that his presidential term expired last year, and that the Ukrainian leader has refused to call a new election, citing martial law. Ukrainian troops have been on the back foot for months, with Moscow making advances in Donbass and elsewhere. Moscow has insisted that any settlement should see Ukraine commit to bloc neutrality, demilitarization and denazification, as well as recognize the new territorial reality on the ground, including the status of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye Regions, all of which have voted to become parts of Russia.

“The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit..”

• Trump Praises ‘Warm’ Meeting With Putin (RT)

US President Donald Trump has described his summit in Alaska with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, as a “warm meeting,” and suggested that the Ukraine conflict is close to being resolved. In an interview with Fox News, the US leader praised the three-hour talks with Putin in Anchorage on Friday, noting that they had made progress in talks mainly focused on ending the hostilities between Russia and Ukraine. “Actually, I think we agree on a lot. I can tell you, the meeting was… warm,” Trump said, calling Putin a “strong guy.” The US leader earlier suggested that he would “give today a ten” when it came to the outcome of the summit. According to Trump, the sides are “pretty close to the end” of the conflict, although he added that “Ukraine has to agree” to any potential peace deal.

He would not provide any details of the discussions, saying only that “there’s one or two pretty significant items, but I think they can be reached.” The US president also noted that he had “always had a great relationship with President Putin, and we would have done great things together,” while praising Russia as a land brimming with natural resources. Putin similarly described the talks with Trump as “constructive” and “useful,” saying Moscow was “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the hostilities. He also suggested that the two leaders could hold their next meeting in Moscow, with Trump replying that he could “see it possibly happening.”

“We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions.”

• Talks with Trump ‘Constructive’ – Putin (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin has called his talks with US President Donald Trump in Anchorage on Friday “constructive” and “useful.” The discussions focused largely on the Ukraine conflict. Moscow is “sincerely interested in putting an end” to the ongoing hostilities, Putin stressed. “We have always considered the Ukrainian people…fraternal, as strange as it may sound in today’s conditions. We have the same roots and everything that is happening is a tragedy and a great pain for us,” he said. Speaking at the press conference, Trump remarked that the meeting was highly productive, although the two sides didn’t reached full agreement and no deal was finalized yet.

He highlighted the significant progress made during the discussions and affirmed his strong relationship with President Putin. Putin said that in recent years – under the administration of Joe Biden – US-Russia relations had sunk “to their lowest point since the Cold War,” which benefits neither the two countries nor the world as a whole. “It is obvious that sooner or later it was necessary to correct the situation and the transition from confrontation to dialogue had to take place. In this regard, a personal meeting of the heads of the two states was really overdue,” he said. The negotiations at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson lasted nearly three hours.

The Russian delegation for the Alaska summit also included Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Defense Minister Andrey Belousov, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov, and presidential economic envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who has been a key figure in the Ukraine settlement process. Trump was accompanied by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

“Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.”

• ‘Next Time In Moscow’ – Putin to Trump (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin made a rare public switch to English to invite US President Donald Trump to Moscow for the next round of peace talks, following their summit in Anchorage, Alaska on Friday. Trump said he could see the meeting taking place though it would likely face political pushback. Speaking at the press conference, Trump called the meeting “extremely productive” and said, “we didn’t get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there,” implying no deal had been reached yet. He said the talks marked significant progress and reaffirmed what he described as his strong relationship with Putin. “Today’s agreements will help us restart pragmatic relations,” Trump said.

At the close of the press conference, Trump thanked Putin and said he expected to speak with him again soon. “Next time in Moscow,” Putin said in English. “That’s an interesting one,” Trump replied. “I’ll get a little heat for that one. But I can see it possibly happening.” Putin thanked Trump for what he called a “friendly” tone and “results-oriented” approach, saying it could “start us on the path towards a resolution in Ukraine.” He described the talks as “constructive” and reiterated his view that there would have been no war in Ukraine if Trump had been president when the conflict broke out. No details of any deal were provided, and neither Putin nor Trump took questions from reporters.

Zelensky tweeted he’ll be in Washington on Monday. He’ll try and bring the entire EU.

• Lasting Settlement Essential In Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)

For a lasting resolution to the Ukraine conflict to be achieved, all of its root causes must be addressed, Russia’s legitimate concerns taken into account, and a fair global security balance restored, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a joint press conference with his US counterpart, Donald Trump, on Friday. The two men met in Alaska for a much-anticipated summit, to discuss restoring bilateral relations and to work toward a resolution of the Ukraine conflict. Putin acknowledged the willingness of the US administration and President Trump to engage in dialogue and seek solutions, noting their commitment to understanding the complexities of the situation.

He reiterated his view that Russians and Ukrainians are brotherly peoples and described the current circumstances as a tragedy, stressing Moscow’s sincere desire to bring the conflict to an end. Putin said that any sustainable resolution must address the root causes of the crisis while taking into account Russia’s legitimate concerns. “A fair balance of security in Europe and globally must be restored,” he stated. Putin agreed with Trump that ensuring Ukraine’s security is imperative and expressed a readiness to collaborate on the issue. He expressed hope that the mutual understanding reached during the discussions will pave the way toward peace.

“We hope that this will be perceived constructively in Kiev and European capitals, and that no obstacles will be created,” Putin stressed. “There should be no attempts to undermine the anticipated progress through provocations or behind-the-scenes intrigue.” Trump stressed that the key takeaway of the talks is that there is a reasonable opportunity to achieve peace. He expressed hope to meet Putin again soon, noting that the Russian president shares his desire to bring the conflict to an end.

“..that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,”

• Judge Napolitano: the Chance for a ‘Grand Reset’ in Russia-US Ties (Sp.)

Presidents Putin and Trump are meeting for the first time in over six years.The main topics on the agenda? Ukraine and Russia-US relations. Veteran journalist and Judging Freedom host Andrew Napolitano shares his insights. The US is “in no position to consent to the very reasonable, intellectually honest and consistent Russian demands” in Ukraine, as its officials don’t seem to fully understand or appreciate Russia’s national security needs, Napolitano told Sputnik, when asked whether the meeting could lead to a speedy cessation of hostilities. The Russian military is already very close to achieving its objectives in the special military operation, Trump knows it, and that puts “President Putin in what Americans call the catbird seat,” Napolitano said.

“Add to those reasons the recent Russian triumphs in the battlefield, which are rather extraordinary and which have left the Ukrainians with very, very little manpower with which to resist the Russian military,” he added. The Putin-Trump meeting could be the “first of many steps” toward a new era “commercial, political, diplomatic, cultural integration” between the two nations, a “grand reset” that could require help from other rising global powers to fully realize. “That’s not going to happen today, and it may have to involve other countries like China, Brazil and India, maybe even Iran, but the grand reset between Russia and the United States, I believe, is a personal goal of President Putin and an aspiration of Donald Trump,” Napolitano said.

Written pre-summit.

• A New Security Order Is On The Table In Alaska (Lukyanov)

It has been a long time since a diplomatic event drew as much global attention as Friday’s meeting between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska. In terms of its significance for the international balance, it is comparable only to the negotiations on German reunification 35 years ago. That process laid the foundations for political developments in the decades that followed. The Alaska talks could prove a similar milestone – not just for the Ukraine conflict, but for the principles on which a broader settlement between the world’s leading powers might be reached. Ukraine has become the most visible arena for historical shifts that go far beyond its borders. But if the German analogy holds, no one should expect a breakthrough from a single meeting. The marathon of high-level diplomacy in 1990 lasted many months, and the mood then was far less acute and far more optimistic than today.

The dense fog of leaks and speculation surrounding Alaska underlines its importance. Much of this “white noise” comes from two sources: commentators eager to sound informed, and political actors seeking to shape public opinion. In reality, the substantive preparation for the talks appears to have little to do with the propaganda framing. This is why official announcements so often catch outside observers by surprise. That may be a good sign. In recent decades, especially in Europe, diplomacy has often been accompanied by a steady drip of confidential details to the press – a habit that may serve tactical purposes but rarely produces lasting results. In this case, it is better to wait for the outcome, or the lack of one, without giving in to the temptation to guess what will happen behind closed doors.

There is also a broader backdrop that cannot be ignored: the shifts in the global order catalyzed by the Ukraine crisis, though not caused by it. For years, I have been skeptical of claims that the world is dividing neatly into two opposing camps – “the West” versus “the rest.” Economic interdependence remains too deep for even sharp political and military conflicts to sever ties entirely. Yet contradictions between these blocs are growing, and they are increasingly material rather than ideological. A key trigger was US President Donald Trump’s recent attempt to pressure the largest states of the so-called “global majority” – China, India, Brazil, and South Africa – to fall in line with Washington’s instructions. The old liberal order promised universality and some benefits to participants. Now, purely American mercantile interests dominate.

As before, Washington dresses its demands in political justifications – criticizing Brazil and South Africa over their treatment of the opposition, or attacking India and China over their ties with Moscow. But the inconsistencies are obvious. Trump, unlike his predecessors, prefers tariffs to sanctions. Tariffs are an explicitly economic tool, but they are now being wielded for political ends.

“..they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough…”

• Why Putin and Trump Had To Talk In Person (Bordachev)

The meeting between the presidents of Russia and the United States in Alaska is not an end point, but the beginning of a long journey. It will not resolve the turbulence that has gripped humanity – but it matters to everyone. In international politics, there have been few moments when meetings between the leaders of major powers have decided questions of universal importance. This is partly because situations requiring attention at such a level are rare. We are living through one now: since the start of Russia’s military operation against Ukraine, Washington has declared its aim to be the “strategic defeat” of Russia, while Moscow has challenged the West’s monopoly over world affairs. Another reason is practical. Leaders of the world’s most powerful states do not waste time on problems that can be solved by subordinates.

And history shows that even when top-level meetings do occur, they rarely change the overall course of international politics. It is no surprise, then, that the Alaska meeting has been compared to famous encounters from the past – notably the 1807 meeting between the Russian and French emperors on a raft in the Neman River. That summit did not prevent Napoleon from attacking Russia five years later – an act that ultimately brought about his own downfall. Later, at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Russia was the only power represented by its ruler on a regular basis. Tsar Alexander I insisted on presenting his personal vision for Europe’s political structure. It failed to win over the other great powers, who, as Henry Kissinger once noted, preferred to discuss interests rather than ideals.

History is full of high-level talks that preceded war rather than preventing it. European monarchs would meet, fail to agree, and then march their armies. Once the fighting ended, their envoys would sit down to negotiate. Everyone understood that “eternal peace” was usually just a pause before the next conflict. The 2021 Geneva summit between Russia and the US may well be remembered in this way – as a meeting that took place on the eve of confrontation. Both sides left convinced their disputes could not be resolved at the time. In its aftermath, Kiev was armed, sanctions were readied, and Moscow accelerated military-technical preparations. Russia’s own history offers parallels. The most famous “summit” of ancient Rus was the 971 meeting between Prince Svyatoslav and Byzantine Emperor John Tzimiskes, following a peace treaty.

According to historian Nikolay Karamzin, they “parted as friends” – but that did not stop the Byzantines from unleashing the Pechenegs against Svyatoslav on his journey home. In Asia, traditions were different. The status of Chinese and Japanese emperors did not permit meetings with equals; such encounters were legally and culturally impossible. When the modern European “world order” was created – most famously in the 1648 Peace of Westphalia – it was not through grand encounters of rulers but through years of negotiations among hundreds of envoys. By then, after 30 years of war, all sides were too exhausted to continue fighting. That exhaustion made it possible to agree on a comprehensive set of rules for relations between states.

Seen in this historical light, top-level summits are exceedingly rare, and those that produce fundamental change are rarer still. The tradition of two leaders speaking on behalf of the entire global system is a product of the Cold War, when Moscow and Washington alone had the ability to destroy or save the world. Even if Roman and Chinese emperors had met in the third century, it would not have transformed the fate of the world. The great empires of antiquity could not conquer the planet in a single war with each other. Russia – as the USSR before it – and the United States can. In the last three years, they have often stood on the brink of a path from which there would be no return. This is why Alaska matters, even if it does not yield a breakthrough.

“..when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?”

• The EU Throws An Epic Tantrum As Trump Meets With Putin (Marsden)

The European Union had been wailing about “transatlantic unity” in the run-up to US President Trump heading to the negotiating table with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday – without it. It sounded like a toddler stomping their feet because Daddy let go of their hand in the mall and now they’re lost between Cinnabon and Burger King. A lot of good their dogmatic rhetoric has done them so far. If it wasn’t for Brussels getting drunk on its own transatlantic solidarity and unity propaganda, maybe it wouldn’t currently be in economic and political dire straits. The kind where you’re trying to duct-tape your economy back together with overpriced American gas.

They could have charted a different path vis-a-vis Russia. Maybe one that involved spearheading diplomacy rather than marching in lockstep behind the US-led NATO parade of weapons and fighters on Russia’s border with Ukraine, which helped supercharge the conflict in the first place. They could have insisted on keeping their cheap Russian energy instead of sanctioning their own imports like they were vying for a Nobel Prize in masochism. Now, the US is daring them to even close their clever little loophole in their own anti-Russian sanctions. The one that lets them moralize about helping Ukraine and the need to avoid negotiations with Russia while guzzling Russian fuel on the down-low. Trump Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told them to “put up or shut up” and sanction the Indian and Chinese importers of Russian petroleum through which the EU still buys Russian fuel.

While the EU indulges itself in rhetorical games, Trump has dropped all pretexts of serving any interests but America’s first, and isn’t following any agenda beyond trying to wrap things up with Russia in Ukraine and to score some economic wins in the process. Brussels has had more than three years to do the same. Instead, it kept repeating the mantra that Kiev had to win on the battlefield. There were no other options, it said. Whoops! Now that the option has materialized, the Europeans are relegated to running behind Trump, pleading with him to indulge them by letting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky decide where the post-conflict borders will be. What did they think the downside of their “win by force” gamble would be, if not changed borders?

The EU insists on Ukraine fighting Russia with EU cash and weapons, and when Kiev loses, they say, “Ok, well this sucks – how about if everyone just pretends that none of this happened and we dial all the territorial gains and losses back to a point of our choosing, okay?” The EU insisted on waiting for someone else to take the initiative for peace. Now all it can do is pick up its pom-poms and cheer Trump on. Then hope that he rewards it. As Zelensky’s self-appointed babysitters, instead of spending the past week in the run-up to the Alaska summit insisting that Putin and Trump allow a high chair booster seat and a pack of crayons at the negotiating table so he can show them where he wants the borders, maybe the Europeans should have been calming him down and managing expectations.

He sounded like he was treating his phone like a toy, calling up everyone in the contacts under “EU” – Estonia, Denmark, probably a few pizza places. The EU has tried to gaslight Trump with the same rhetoric that it constantly firehoses onto European citizens about peace in Ukraine being a dangerous gateway drug for Russia to invade Western Europe – a convenient marketing pitch to justify boosting the weapons industry to the detriment of domestic priorities. Not even warhawk US Senator Lindsey Graham is saying that now, telling NBC News that “Russia is not going to Kiev”…let alone the EU. European leaders treated Wednesday’s video call with Trump like a win. Perhaps because he didn’t explicitly tell them off, for once. But they really have no idea what he’ll actually discuss with Putin, nor do they have leverage over any eventual US–Russia deal.

They don’t know whether Trump is just placating them because he doesn’t need a bunch of hysterical circus clowns in the mix. So how could the EU spin this to avoid looking completely irrelevant? “Today Europe, the US and NATO have strengthened the common ground for Ukraine, we will remain in close coordination. Nobody wants peace more than us. A just and lasting peace,” said unelected EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Yeah, sounds desperate for peace, alright. Which must be why the EU is building weapons factories at breakneck speed, according to the Financial Times. Nothing says “we’re committed to ending the war” like tripling down on weapons. What are you going to do with all those if peace breaks out? Toss them in the landfill and hope that taxpayers forget about the boondoggle, like you did with the hundreds of millions of unused Covid jabs?

“It’s funny they call [intel] a ‘community.’ That sounds so benign and beneficial. Everybody likes communities.” —Doug Casey

• Carefully and Gracefully (James Howard Kunstler)

And so, now, in Alaska, Mr. Trump sits down with Vlad Putin to attempt a settling of Ukraine’s hash. This war has been a three-year bloody grind, millions killed, mostly Ukrainians, provoked underhandedly by US State Dept / CIA neocons, Britain’s MI6 apparatus, and the girl-bosses of the EU, for no good reason, namely, to weaken and possibly break-up Russia so as to get at its vast mineral and energy resources. This has been tried before in history, always to the grief of the triers. From our country’s point of view, the dynamics in play at this moment are delicate to an extreme. In the background of the Trump-Putin meet-up, amid an eerie silence in the DOJ and FBI, an epic, sweeping prosecution of the RussiaGate hoaxers creeps forward.

RussiaGate, of course, was born in the false charge (by America’s highest officials, derived from nonsense cooked up by Hillary Clinton) that Donald Trump was a Russian agent. It was preposterous and continually disproven, but the many-footed creatures of America’s deep state, which controlled so many levers of power, dragged it out for years. Altogether, that endeavor amounted to a campaign of sedition and arguably treason. The delicacy comes in as President Trump must now avoid at all costs any appearance of giving-in to Mr. Putin, of appearing to be any sort of a vassal — “Putin’s puppet,” as charged in RussiaGate. The raw truth is that Russia has likely already “won” the war in Ukraine, in the sense that it has finally gained control of the battlespace and worn out its opponent. It is fait accompli.

What remains is the disposition of Ukraine’s future which, in another raw truth, is mostly Russia’s to determine. Yet another raw truth is that this would probably be the best outcome for all concerned: a neutralized, disarmed Ukraine returned to its prior condition as a mostly agricultural sovereign backwater of Europe within Russia’s sphere-of-influence, resuming its longstanding status as not being a problem for anyone. Still, yet another raw truth is that the USA would benefit hugely from normalized relations with Russia, no more sanctions, fair trade, a rebalance of the drift toward China, lessening the chance of nuclear war — and this would even benefit the knuckleheads of Europe whose economies are imploding due to a lack of affordable energy (and also because of, let’s face it, the EU’s terrifically stupid “green” policies).

All of which means there will necessarily be a lot of “pretend” played in Anchorage for show. Mr. Trump must pretend to be tough on Putin, and Mr. Putin must pretend, a little bit, to give-in to Mr. Trump’ proposals. That is, it will be something of a kabuki, a kafabe. Surely, many of the stickiest points have been pre-negotiated by Mr. Trump’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, who quietly visited Moscow a week ago. Mr. Trump must appear strong with Russia because his appointees are commencing to go medieval on the folks who called him “Putin’s Puppet” nine years ago — and subjected him to a series of epic torments including the subversion of his whole first term in office, nonstop obloquy from the media, impeachment (X 2), home invasion, and a grotesque set of malicious, nitwit prosecutions that have either failed completely (Fani Willis, Jack Smith) or will be subject to humiliating reversals in the higher courts. Not to mention two attempted assassinations.

You should assume that Mr. Putin well understands all this and intends to play along. He will appear to make some generous concessions to Ukraine, starting with the promise that it can go forward as a sovereign, self-governing nation. The big enchilada might be to grant that Ukraine can retain possession of Odessa, the port city on the Black Sea which is Ukraine’s depot for export to the world of its chief commodity, grains. In any case, both Russia and the USA intend to relieve Volodymyr Zelenskyy of his duties — notice he is conspicuously not invited to the Alaska meeting. Mr. Trump well understands that one way or another, Russia is going to prevail in this conflict on-the-ground. He abhors all the killing. He has already expressed a disinclination to keep backing the war with money and weapons. He must be disgusted at how the Bidens (and the Deep State) used Ukraine as a money-laundry, as a site for bioweapons labs, and how it served as a nexus for human trafficking.

He also knows that Russia wants badly to be re-admitted to normal relations with the West, which is in everybody’s interest, except perhaps China’s. You should infer therefore that Russia wants the war to end in a way that does not humiliate the losers and backers — perhaps along the lines of how America managed our victory against our enemies in World War Two, carefully and gracefully.

“The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!”

• Scott Ritter: Two Things Need to Happen for Trump to Get His Ceasefire (Sp.)

The Ukrainian crisis is front and center of the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska. Sputnik asked renowned geopolitical analyst, former Marine Corps intelligence officer and ex-UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to weigh in on the high stakes meeting. First things first: the US president “doesn’t care about the geopolitical nuances of Ukrainian battlefield locations,” Ritter said. “If Putin can convince him that the quickest route to a ceasefire is for Ukraine to leave” Russia’s new territories “and say no to NATO, that’s it. That’s all that has to happen for a ceasefire.” The Russian military has mastered drone warfare, counter-drone warfare, and new battlefield tactics to the point where its advance has become “an irreversible process,” Ritter added, commenting on what happens if the peace push doesn’t pan out.

“There’s nothing that can be done. Nothing can be done to stop this. The advantage is 100% Russia, and we’re looking at the Ukrainians on the verge of total collapse,” the observer stressed. Trump’s base doesn’t want to continue fueling a proxy conflict against Russia, much less getting into a hot war with Russia over Ukraine, Ritter said. “Don’t worry about Congress. They don’t elect the president, and they will fall in behind the president, because if he can secure his base with a peace deal, he can ruin everybody in Congress, especially a Republican, who goes against him,” he stressed.

In November 2024, the CIA briefed Congress on the risks of a nuclear war breaking out, estimating that there was a “greater than 50% chance” thanks to the Biden administration’s decision to greenlight long-range ATACMS strikes into Russia, Ritter revealed.

“The director of plans of Strategic Command, the American military command that carries out nuclear war briefed a Washington, DC think tank in November that the United States is prepared for a nuclear exchange with Russia, (that means nuclear war) and that the United States thought they were going to win,” he said. “When this was briefed to Congress, I asked a senior Democrat…’when the CIA briefed you, did the CIA say the Russians were bluffing?’ He said no. The CIA said the exact opposite. He said but that’s not the scary thing. The scary thing is that the Biden administration officials who were in that room said ‘oh we’re ready for that. If the Russians wanna play, we’re ready to go to nuclear war with them.’ This is the insanity that existed in November of last year!” Ritter stressed.

Peace with Russia means these tariffs also must disappear.

• US Has ‘No Right’ To Tell India Who To Trade With – Jeffrey Sachs (RT)

The United States has no right to tell India who it can partner with in trade, Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University, said on Friday. The economist was commenting in an interview with NDTV television on Washington’s decision to impose additional tariffs on India over its purchases of Russian oil. Last week, the White House announced an extra 25% tariff on Indian imports, raising the overall tariff level faced by the South Asian nation to 50%. US President Donald Trump said the measure was prompted by India’s continued imports of Russian oil. New Delhi condemned the move as “extremely unfortunate” and pledged to safeguard its national interests. Sachs described the tariff increase as a clear reason for India to remain cautious in its dealings with Washington.

“Don’t rely on them. India needs a diversified base of partners – Russia, China, ASEAN countries, Africa, and not see itself as mainly focusing on the US market, which is going to be unstable, slow-growing and basically protectionist,” according to Sachs. Addressing India’s imports of Russian oil, Sachs stated that Washington has no authority to determine the trading relations of other nations. The US “does not act responsibly towards other countries. Be careful. India should not allow itself to be used by the US, somehow, in the US’ misguided trade war with China,” the economist noted.

New Delhi is now seeking to expand its export presence in the 50 countries that account for about 90% of its total exports in an effort to offset the impact of the higher tariffs, according to local media reports, citing government sources. The initiative is intended to reduce reliance on any single market and to minimize risks arising from trade disruptions. In response to the US threats to impose secondary sanctions on Russia’s trade partners, including India, China, and Brazil, Moscow stated that it believes “sovereign states should have, and do have, the right to choose their own trade partners,” as well as to independently determine which avenues of cooperation best serve their national interests.

“Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.”

• US Gov’t Ditches Musk’s AI Over ‘Anti-Semitism’ (RT)

The US government has dropped Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok from a planned federal technology program following controversy over anti-Semitic content and conspiracy theories produced by the bot, Wired reported on Thursday. Grok, developed by Musk’s AI startup xAI, is built into his social media platform X. It offers fact checks, quick context on trending topics, and replies to user arguments. Musk has promoted xAI as a rival to OpenAI and Google’s DeepMind, but the chatbot has faced criticism over offensive and inflammatory outputs. According to the report, xAI was in advanced talks with the General Services Administration (GSA), the agency in charge of US government tech procurement, to give federal workers access to its AI tools. Grok had already been added to the GSA’s long-term procurement list, enabling agencies to buy it.

Earlier this month, the GSA announced partnerships with other AI providers – Anthropic, Google’s Gemini, and Box’s AI-powered content platform – while reportedly also telling staff to remove xAI’s Grok from the offering. Two GSA employees told Wired they believe the chatbot was dropped over its anti-Semitic tirade last month, when it praised Adolf Hitler and called itself “MechaHitler.” The posts were deleted, and xAI apologized for the “horrific behavior,” pledging to block hate speech before Grok goes live. The bot also pushed the “white genocide” conspiracy theory and echoed Holocaust denial rhetoric, which xAI blamed on unauthorized prompt changes.

This week, it was briefly suspended from X after stating that Israel and the US were committing genocide in Gaza – allegations both countries reject. Musk has continued to praise the chatbot, recently writing: “East, West, @Grok is the best.” The move to drop Grok comes as part of a broader push by the administration of US President Donald Trump to modernize the federal government under an action plan unveiled last month that provides for less regulation and wider adoption of AI. However, the rapid growth of AI has triggered concern about its potential to spread misinformation, reinforce bias, and operate without accountability. Experts say that unless strong safeguards are in place, poorly moderated AI tools could also expose children to harmful or inappropriate content.

All the more now Trump has put them at the kiddies table.

• EU Leaders Want To Overthrow Three European Governments – Budapest (RT)

The European Union is attempting to topple the governments of Hungary, Slovakia, and Serbia for prioritizing national interests over alignment with Brussels, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has claimed. He made the comments in a Facebook post on Thursday after phone calls with Slovak Foreign Minister Juraj Blanar and Serbia’s top diplomat, Marko Duric. According to Szijjarto, they agreed to strengthen their stance on sovereignty and pledged mutual solidarity amid what they described as growing external pressure. “Brussels has ceased to be a factor in world politics. The fact that Europe has been excluded from the Alaska talks proves it,” he wrote, referring to Friday’s summit between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss the Ukraine conflict.

https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1956065724088172985

Kiev’s backers in Europe have repeatedly called to be included in any talks involving Russia, Ukraine, and the US, insisting that “a European power” should be “in the room” to guarantee that the security interests of Kiev and the EU are “safeguarded.” Unlike the EU, which continues to support Ukraine’s war effort, Szijjarto said Hungary, Serbia, and Slovakia have prioritized national interests and resisted pressure from Brussels, favoring peace talks over military involvement. “This obviously frustrates the mainstream liberal political leaders, and as a result, the pressure is increasing on governments that are supporting peace, following national interests, and not subordinating to Brussels,” the diplomat said.

It’s “clearer than daylight” that “external intervention experiments to destabilize and overthrow governments are taking place in Central Europe against the patriot Slovak, Hungarian, and Serbian governments,” he added. Szijjarto criticized recent polling in Slovakia, which suggested citizens “only trust revolution,” and accused Brussels of trying to undermine Hungary’s elected leadership by supporting the opposition Tisza Party. He also referenced recent clashes between protesters and police in Serbia, implying that external forces were stirring unrest to destabilize the government. According to Szijjarto, these “are all different chapters of the same scenario in Brussels: they want to clean up the peace-party, patriot, national-interest governments,” aiming to replace them with puppet governments so Brussels “can get a seat.”

GoF
https://twitter.com/sheislaurenlee/status/1956140482960183359

100
https://twitter.com/DavidJHarrisJr/status/1956106786903388484

https://twitter.com/LangmanVince/status/1956366054529089828

Bees

Did you know that in Romania, trucks loaded with beehives are rented out to flower growers?

These massive rigs become mobile "bee hotels," buzzing with thousands of bees that pollinate fields of flowers and crops.pic.twitter.com/ogQGJuevwC

— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) August 14, 2025

Bob
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956110689359003751

https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1956330600387821710

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

Debt Rattle September 15 2024

Sep 152024

September 15, 2024 Posted by Raúl Ilargi Meijer at 8:34 am Finance Tagged with: abortion, information war, Kamala, lawfare, nuclear war, nukes, RT, Trump, War Party 47 Responses »

Ford Madox Brown Finding of Don Juan by Haidee 1873

• US Presidential Debate Delusion: 2 Candidates For 1 Party… The War Party (SCF)

• Harris Wants War With Russia – Trump (RT)

• Russia Had Reason To Use Nukes, But Showed Restraint – Medvedev (RT)

• US Can’t Hide From Nuclear War – Moscow (RT)

• US Sanctions RT (RT)

• US Has Declared Information War On Russian Media – Zakharova (RT)

• US Media And Intelligence Services Have Long Merged – RT Editor-in-Chief (RT)

• Lawfare Collapsing Amidst Harris’ Vow To Prosecute Trump (Spivak)

• The West Is Ensuring Kiev’s Demise On Purpose (Amar)

• Is the West Attempting to Destroy Kiev Demographically? (Miles)

• BRICS, The Rise Of China And The Concept Of “Security” (Pepe Escobar)

• The Fake ‘War On Terror’ Collapses (Pepe Escobar)

• Israel Exists to Help West Loot, Dominate Middle East (Miles)

• The Abortion Issue (Paul Craig Roberts)

The MAGA people

WATCH: RFK Jr.'s running mate Nicole Shanahan just released another awesome video ENDING the media's lies about "The MAGA People." It shows how they have lied about Trump supporters and vilified them for years

"Contrary to what we have been told, we found the MAGA People to be… pic.twitter.com/rZyXxN6eJP

— George (@BehizyTweets) September 13, 2024

Jesse

NEW: Trump now seems open to another debate, after ruling it out. This after one of the ABC moderator’s “fact-checks” was proved wrong. The bias is so blatant that even Democrats are demanding a full investigation into the debate. pic.twitter.com/HUl8KZB7Ai

— Jesse Watters (@JesseBWatters) September 14, 2024

Ritter
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834688146778263579

Newest ad
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834653270385545249

NEW: The Trump campaign has shared Kamala Harris' entire interview that was released today, saying their "newest ad just dropped."

Brutal.

In the interview, Harris gave confusing answers to a variety of questions:

Gun Control: Harris says she *does* think America needs an… pic.twitter.com/f1jN2jiIFk

— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 14, 2024

Abdul

The dishonest, corrupt media in all of their glory.

"There is no Abdul. Trump made it up."

In 2021, before the botched withdrawal, Biden's CIA Director met with the same Abdul that they now claim doesn't exist.

Share this far and wide. Someone should get it to Trump. pic.twitter.com/TphmTO1fd4

— MAZE (@mazemoore) September 13, 2024

Vivek machine

The Supreme Court gave us the toolkit we need to dismantle the permanent bureaucracy. All we need is a president willing to pick up those tools & get to work. pic.twitter.com/krsts0sOxs

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) September 14, 2024

Nevada
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834805819809948137

Real fact check

This is the greatest fact-check to ever exist. It will never get better than this. Savor it. pic.twitter.com/V6U6q4EF8t

— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) September 14, 2024

Tucker

Tucker Carlson: "If they think that there's a chance that Trump could win decisively enough in November that they can't steal it, then I think their only option there is to in some way throw the society into chaos as they did during COVID which was the pretext for changing the… pic.twitter.com/e3mAkQPo8T

— Camus (@newstart_2024) September 14, 2024

Yeah..no. What few people realize, and the editors at Strategic Culture sure don’t, is the impact of Bobby Kennedy joining Trump’s campaign. Kennedy will certainly have demanded no wars. End Ukraine, end Gaza -one way or another-, and no new ones. And Trump okayed this.

• US Presidential Debate Delusion: 2 Candidates For 1 Party… The War Party (SCF)

Two events dominated international news this week: the TV debate between U.S. presidential candidates, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump; and reports that Washington and its NATO allies are gearing up to permit the Ukrainian regime to use their long-range missiles to hit deep into the territory of the Russian Federation. The latter move would be viewed in Moscow as a major escalation from a proxy war to a direct conflict between nuclear powers. The aforementioned events are tightly connected. The U.S. presidential election is less than two months away with Democrat Harris and Republican Trump vying in a hotly contested and divisive race for the White House. Harris, the incumbent vice president, performed best in the live TV debate, according to polls. Trump, however, with characteristic brashness, claimed that he had won the debate.

His subsequent refusal to engage in a follow-up second debate might infer that the Trump campaign fears that Harris was able to get the upper hand over her older opponent, who sounded hackneyed and incoherent. We are talking here about superficial style and not substance, which neither candidate has much of. Discernibly, the U.S. establishment favors Harris to win. Most of the American media are supportive of what would be the first woman to become president of the United States, and a woman of color too. That credential alone burnishes the image of the American republic as a supposed bastion of democracy and liberal values. More importantly for the American deep state – or ruling class – is that Harris is more aligned with its imperialist foreign policy. As with her current boss, President Joe Biden, Harris spoke belligerently about confronting Russia and unwavering support for the conflict in Ukraine.

The Washington establishment wants Harris to win on November 5 to ensure the continuation of the proxy war against Russia. The all-dominant military-industrial complex at the heart of U.S. capitalism wants the war racket to keep churning out mega profits. But also in the bigger geopolitical picture, the conflict with Russia is just one element in a wider policy of confrontation with other foreign powers, primarily China, or any other nation that challenges U.S. presumptions of hegemony. As we argued in our editorial last week, the United States is endeavoring to offset its failing global power by pursuing an intensified policy of aggression and bellicosity even if such a policy puts the entire planet at risk of catastrophic world war. The highly choreographed move this week by the United States and Britain to give the Ukrainian regime permission to use long-range missiles to strike deep into Russia is tightly correlated with the high-stakes presidential election.

Even Western media are reporting that the Ukrainian regime is in dire straits as Russian forces make significant gains in the Donbass region as well as pushing back the month-old Kursk offensive. A telling report by CNN seemed to catch up with the reality that many independent observers have already been pointing out, namely that Ukrainian defenses are collapsing. The Biden administration cannot afford an embarrassing defeat in Ukraine before the November election. Candidate Harris would be indelibly damaged by the loss of prestige especially given the huge political and financial capital invested to “defend Ukraine from Russian aggression”. Hence, giving the Kiev regime another lifeline of long-range weapons is aimed at making the floundering Zelensky junta hang on for another few weeks to get past the U.S. election.

Donald Trump would benefit greatly from the debacle of defeat in Ukraine. The former Republican president is pitching his bid to return to the White House on pushing a peace deal in Ukraine and “preventing World War Three”. Trump’s maverick disparagement of the NATO alliance and European allies is partly why the U.S. establishment does not favor him. By comparison, Harris is a more pliable tool for American warmongering, especially regarding confrontation with Russia. Trump’s talk about negotiating a resolution in Ukraine is problematic for the militaristic deep state. However, it is important to disabuse the notion that Trump is a peace candidate. He may have an inchoate inclination to scale back the U.S. aggression against Russia, but the Republican contender is more belligerent than his Democrat rival toward China and Iran. Trump is fully supportive of Israel’s genocide in Palestine.

It is fair to say that if Trump were president again, the U.S. foreign policy of warmongering would merely shift to some other region of the world. Trump’s talk about stopping World War Three is not credible. When he was president (2016-2020), he stoked the NeoNazi Ukrainian regime to wage its genocidal war against ethnic Russians in the Donbass, which led to Russia’s military intervention in February 2022. He was also gung-ho about cutting Europe off from Russian gas and putting pressure on Germany to cancel the Nord Stream project. Biden later ordered the blowing up of the undersea Baltic pipeline in September 2022. Pitching himself as a peacemaker in Ukraine is Trump’s cynical attempt to tap votes among many Americans who are rightly alarmed by the reckless proxy war against Russia. It boils down to rhetorical posturing.

“..a vote for comrade Kamala Harris is a vote for war with Russia.”

• Harris Wants War With Russia – Trump (RT)

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has asserted that an election victory for his rival, Vice President Kamala Harris, would ultimately lead to war with Russia, warning of an impending “nuclear Holocaust.” During a campaign rally in Las Vegas, Nevada, on Friday, Trump expressed concern about a potential nuclear conflict due to the “incompetent people” in Washington, claiming he is the only one capable of preventing a global war. “You’re going to end up in World War III. You’re going to have a nuclear Holocaust if we’re not careful. These people have no idea what they’re doing,” he warned supporters, promising to keep Americans “out of World War III.” “I will end the chaos in the Middle East, and I will settle the war in Ukraine… I will resolve that as president-elect,” he continued, arguing that “a vote for comrade Kamala Harris is a vote for war with Russia.”

Trump claimed that Harris aims to reinstate military conscription to “draft your child and put them in a war that should never have happened.” The former US president insists that the conflict in Ukraine would not have escalated if he had been in office at the time. Throughout his reelection campaign, he has repeatedly claimed he could stop the fighting “in 24 hours,” though he has not specified how. Earlier this week, Trump’s running mate, Ohio Senator J.D. Vance, shed light on a possible peace proposal, suggesting it would likely involve creating a demilitarized zone around the current line of contact and guaranteeing Ukraine’s neutrality to Moscow, which aligns with one of Russia’s main objectives. Harris, however, contends that Trump would abandon Ukraine, asserting that her efforts, along with the supply of ammunition, have ensured the country remains “independent and free” to this day.

Putin speaks through his alter ego.

• Russia Had Reason To Use Nukes, But Showed Restraint – Medvedev (RT)

Throughout the Ukraine conflict, Russia has had ample reason to use nuclear weapons, but has so far exercised restraint, the deputy chair of Russia’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, has said. He warned, however, that Moscow’s patience is not limitless, suggesting that Russia could respond harshly if Western nations allow Kiev to use the missiles they have provided to strike targets deep inside Russian territory. Kiev has been demanding that these limitations be lifted since at least May. Several media outlets have recently alleged that Washington and London will soon do so, or secretly have already.

In a post on his Telegram channel on Saturday, Medvedev wrote that Western leaders have lulled themselves into a false sense of security, thinking that Moscow is bluffing when it warns of dire consequences for allowing long-range missile strikes. The official, who was also the Russian president from 2008 to 2012, said Russia is fully aware that conducting a nuclear strike would be a momentous decision. “It is precisely because of this that a decision to use nuclear weapons… has not been made so far,” Medvedev stressed. He added that the “formal prerequisites for this, which are understandable to the entire global community and that are stipulated by our nuclear containment doctrine, are in place.” He cited the Ukrainian offensive in Kursk Region as one example.

“Russia is showing patience,” he said, while warning that “there is always a limit to patience.” Medvedev went on to suggest that Russia could also respond to Western escalation with some sort of new weaponry – not necessarily nuclear, but still devastating. Speaking on Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin argued that the Ukrainian military is not capable of operating Western long-range systems on its own, but needs intelligence from NATO satellites and Western military personnel. For this reason, if the West allows Kiev to hit targets deep inside Russia, “this will mean that NATO countries, the US, European countries are fighting against Russia,” Putin said.

“..Americans will not be able to sit it out behind the waters of this ocean..”

• US Can’t Hide From Nuclear War – Moscow (RT)

Washington will be unable to hide from a nuclear conflict if it starts across the ocean, Russian Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov has said. Fears of a potential escalation between Russia and NATO over Ukraine have been intensifying in recent days, as Western powers reportedly mull the possibility of allowing Kiev to conduct missile strikes deep in Russian territory. Speaking with Rossiya 24 channel on Friday, Ambassador Antonov said that he is surprised at the “illusion” that “if there is a conflict, it will not spread to the territory of the United States of America.” “I am constantly trying to convey to them one thesis that the Americans will not be able to sit it out behind the waters of this ocean. This war will affect everyone, so we constantly say – do not play with this rhetoric,” Antonov stated.

He also mentioned that while Western countries accuse Russia of “sabre-rattling,” the US wants to investigate the consequences a nuclear strike would have for Eastern Europe. Antonov was apparently referring to a study ordered by the US Defense Department to simulate the impact of a nuclear conflict on global agriculture. According to a solicitation notice posted on a government procurement platform, the study will focus on regions “beyond Eastern Europe and Western Russia,” which in the simulation is the epicenter of the hypothetical nuclear attack. On Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that removing restrictions on Ukraine’s use of Western weapons would directly involve the US and its allies in the conflict with Russia and would be met with an appropriate response. Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, later reiterated that granting Kiev permission to use Western-supplied long-range weapons would constitute direct involvement in the conflict by NATO.

“We’ve been broadcasting straight out of the KGB headquarters all this time..”

• US Sanctions RT (RT)

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has accused RT and its parent company of acting as an extension of Russian intelligence and attempting to undermine democracy around the world. Speaking at a State Department press conference on Friday, Blinken announced sanctions designations against RT parent companies Rossiya Segodnya and TV-Novosti, accusing “individuals affiliated” and “elements within” them of allegedly attempting to interfere in the Moldovan elections. The State Department has also sanctioned Dmitry Kiselev, Rossiya Segodnya’s director-general. TV-Novosti was also accused of “being responsible for or complicit in, or having directly or indirectly engaged or attempted to engage in, interference” in US or other foreign elections “for or on behalf of, or for the benefit of, directly or indirectly,” the Russian government.

RT is “engaged in covert influence activities… functioning as a de facto arm of [Russian] intelligence,” Blinken told reporters. Blinken revealed that the US, UK, and Canada plan to launch a global effort to treat RT’s activities as espionage, and hope to attract all of their “allies and partners” to the endeavor. James O’Brien, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, called RT a “threat to democracy and accurate information.” According to the State Department, RT has “moved beyond being simply a media outlet and has been an entity with cyber capabilities,” which is “also engaged in information operations, covert influence, and military procurement.” The US government claimed that “an entity with cyber operational capabilities and ties to Russian intelligence” has been embedded within RT since the spring of 2023 and that RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan and her deputy Anton Anisimov had “direct, witting knowledge of this enterprise.”

Another accusation leveled against RT was that Anisimov has operated a crowdfunding platform “providing material support and weaponry to Russia’s military units in Ukraine.” The State Department claimed that RT has funded “proxy outlets” that engaged in “covert influence activity” around the world, alleging that this has happened in Africa, Germany, France, and Argentina. The head of the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC), James Rubin, told reporters on Friday that the “broad scope and reach” of RT was one of the reasons many countries around the world did not support Ukraine. The GEC has funded propaganda games aimed at children and forced Twitter to censor pro-Russian content. Rubin admitted last year that he wanted to use the GEC to shut down Russian media outlets around the world.

“We are going to be talking… in Latin America, Africa and Asia… to try to show all of those countries that right now broadcast – with no restrictions or control – RT and allow them free access to their countries,” Rubin said, arguing that RT’s presence has “had a deleterious effect on the views of the rest of the world about a war that should be an open and shut case.” The State Department’s announcement was leaked to CNN earlier in the day. When reached for comment by the US outlet, RT’s press office sarcastically replied: “We’ve been broadcasting straight out of the KGB headquarters all this time,” adding, “We’re running out of popcorn to sit and watch what the US government will come up with next about us.”

RT is one of the reasons the world has been not fully supportive of Ukraine – State Dept pic.twitter.com/PhvJYKwE87

— RT (@RT_com) September 13, 2024

“..if the media community does not unite now, if every media corporation head does not understand this, tomorrow… it will be too late..”

• US Has Declared Information War On Russian Media – Zakharova (RT)

The new round of US sanctions against Russian media outlets amounts to a declaration of an “information war,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told RT. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken unveiled new restrictions on Friday targeting RT parent companies Rossiya Segodnya and TV-Novosti. He accused the network of being “engaged in covert influence activities… and functioning as a de facto arm of [Russian] intelligence.” “The degree of aggression with which all of this was expressed is off the scale. I think this is definitely a declaration of information war. It went on behind the scenes through the sanctions policy, but there was no declaration that the Russian media would now be openly attacked,” Zakharova stated.

The renewed attack on Russian media was prompted solely by “jealousy” in the West “because they could not compete” with it fairly, the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said. Washington has provided no actual evidence to back up its allegations against the outlets, she added. “When they say that’s because RT is doing something wrong in the US, if it violated at least one American law, if at least one fake was a sign of some kind of global information campaign that RT is conducting on the territory of the US, if even one RT correspondent had engaged in illegal activities, and an American court of some state or maybe even a Pan-American court would have conducted some kind of investigation long ago, a verdict would have been carried out. But there’s nothing to show.”

This new development should be a wake-up call for media outlets worldwide, Zakharova said, warning that any broadcaster could become the next target. “This suggests that journalists all over the world should now understand that tomorrow this will be done to them. Therefore, if the media community does not unite now, if every media corporation head does not understand this, tomorrow… it will be too late,” the spokeswoman warned.

“It’s very easy to promote freedom of speech and practice it when it’s only your speech that counts and no one else’s..”

• US Media And Intelligence Services Have Long Merged – RT Editor-in-Chief (RT)

Washington seeks to silence any dissenting voices, as its celebrated “freedom of speech” applies only to those who support the official narrative and obey instructions from US intelligence services, RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said following the latest crackdown on Russian media. Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced the latest round of sanctions against the news outlet on Friday, accusing it of engaging in “covert influence activities” and “functioning as a de facto arm of Russian intelligence.” Earlier in September, Washington imposed sanctions on Simonyan and three other senior RT employees over alleged attempts to influence the 2024 election. Simonyan asserted that this latest attack on Russian media is a clear effort to clamp down on the information space ahead of the elections.

“They need to silence everyone. This is the story of freedom and democracy in the so-called free West. It seems to me that only clinically insane people or those who are obviously biased can believe in it,” she stated. In practice, the US idea of a free press doesn’t extend to others, she added. It’s very easy to promote freedom of speech and practice it when it’s only your speech that counts and no one else’s. Simonyan argued that Washington’s claims about RT collaborating with Russian intelligence are a “classic case of projection.”

“The idea that you can’t achieve results without being part of the intelligence service has exposed them for what they are,” she said. She noted that the way US mainstream media publishes various intelligence “leaks” and insider information from unnamed security officials points to their close ties with American intelligence services. “If you look at who runs these foundations and often the media, they’re either families of intelligence employees, former intelligence officers, or future ones,” she added. They receive orders from intelligence services: write this, write that. They have long since merged with each other.

“Trial Judge Juan Merchan has delayed sentencing until Nov. 26, but he first must rule on whether to vacate the verdict..”

• Lawfare Collapsing Amidst Harris’ Vow To Prosecute Trump (Spivak)

Largely shedding Joe Biden’s canard that Trump must be defeated to save democracy, Kamala Harris’ conceit is that she prosecutes criminals and Donald Trump is one. “I know Donald Trump’s type,” she sneers. As San Francisco district attorney and then California attorney general, Harris supported jailing parents of truants, suppressed evidence, keeping an innocent man on death row, repeatedly covered up misconduct, leading to the dismissal of more than 600 cases, incarcerated prisoners beyond their sentences, violated Federal laws that protect donor privacy, and failed to disclose conflicts of interest arising from her personal relationships. Her record of abusing prosecutorial power fits perfectly with Democrat lawfare against Trump and his advisers. Now, following setbacks for prosecutors, Trump will have a reprieve in further substantive proceedings until after the election.

• Colorado, Maine, and Illinois declared Trump an “insurrectionist,” ineligible for the presidency under the 14th Up to 32 other states were considering doing the same. In Trump v. Anderson, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected this travesty. Among other failings, the states violated a requirement that Congress determine the process, and Trump has never been indicted for, let alone convicted of, insurrection.
• The left’s least favorite judge, U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, dismissed the Mar-a-Lago classified records case, holding that Jack Smith’s appointment as special prosecutor violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution (Article II, § 2) and his use of a permanent indefinite appropriation violated the Appropriations Clause (Article I, § 9). The government refused a compromise that might have saved the case, and is appealing.
• In Trump v. United States, a 6-3 court held that a president is immune from prosecution for official acts, his motives cannot be questioned, and his official acts may not be used as evidence in a prosecution of his private acts. Smith has filed a superseding indictment that suffers many of the same defects as the initial indictment, including as to immunity, novel legal theories, and the First Amendment rights of free speech and petition. Despite U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkin’s best efforts to move the case forward, she has bowed to reality and delayed the next hearing until after the election.
• In Fischer v. United States, the Supreme Court threw out federal prosecutors’ use of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) to prosecute Jan. 6 defendants for interfering in congressional proceedings, holding that the statute is limited to tampering with, or destroying, official records. That ruling also will narrow Trump’s election fraud case.
• A Georgia appeals court agreed to hear a challenge to Fani Willis’ right to remain as prosecutor, scheduling arguments too late for a trial this year. Even if Willis prevails, the immunity decision, First Amendment, and misapplication of the Georgia RICO statute likely will doom her case.
• A Nevada court dismissed an indictment against six Republicans accused of submitting certificates to Congress falsely declaring Trump the winner of the state’s 2020 presidential election.

The New York cases are more problematic abuses by prosecutors who ran on platforms of “getting” Trump:
• There are at least a dozen reasons Trump’s conviction in New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s business records case should be reversed. Trial Judge Juan Merchan has delayed sentencing until Nov. 26, but he first must rule on whether to vacate the verdict because he allowed testimony by federal officials (Hopes Hicks and Trump’s assistant) about Trump’s official acts as president, now prohibited by the Supreme Court’s immunity decision. More damaging, in Erlinger v. United States, the Supreme Court held that a unanimous jury verdict is required for any factual finding that increases a potential sentence. Merchan did not require unanimity to identify the so-called “other crime” used to convert an expired business records misdemeanor into 34 felonies.

• Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ so-called civil fraud case for misstating asset values in loan applications, though the banks testified they did not rely on the statements, lost no money, and would continue to do business with Trump. Engoron ordered Trump to pay $455 million and forfeit his New York businesses. The New York appeals court stayed most of Engoron’s ruling and allowed Trump to post a reduced bond of $175 million for his appeal. The finding of liability may survive, but the penalties should be vacated as excessive under the 8th Amendment and Article I §5 of the New York Constitution, among other flaws.

If Trump is elected, he can order that the federal prosecutions against him end, or pardon himself, and the state cases likely will be delayed until he leaves office. If Harris wins, the Democrats can be expected to press forward. Though Trump’s legal team has carved back most of the cases and will continue to do so, a conviction still could mean jail time. Democrats are doing better in their lawfare against Trump’s advisers, who have limited immunity defenses. Several are defendants in Georgia, Arizona, and Michigan. Rudy Guliani and John Eastman are being disbarred, and at least eight other Trump lawyers face disciplinary proceedings. Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon were jailed for refusing to testify to the Jan. 6 Committee. The last time a recalcitrant congressional witness was jailed appears to be 1948.

But for Trump’s wealth and perseverance, he might now be in jail. Democrats financially destroyed or jailed his closest political advisers and are broadly threatening Republican party lawyers. Usually, Harris talks about the criminal justice system from the far left. But, like other progressives, when she is in pursuit mode, the Constitution, equal justice, and fundamental principles are mere affect.

“..the Ukrainian operation has turned into the bloody waste it was destined to be..”

• The West Is Ensuring Kiev’s Demise On Purpose (Amar)

The predictable and predicted is happening again. Despite the coyly teasing dance of seven veils performed by, mostly, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, to those who ignored the noise and focused on the signal, it’s always been clear that Washington and London would decide to – officially and openly – allow and help Ukraine to use their missiles for attacks even deeper into Russia than before. And of course, it’s been obvious to Moscow as well, as Dmitry Peskov, President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman, made clear as early as September 11. That the West is escalating is no surprise. It has a well-established pattern of continually ratcheting-up the stakes in its proxy war – including (but not restricted to) the supply of intelligence, mercenaries, ‘advisors’, various tanks, armored vehicles, missile systems, and recently F-16 fighter planes. Now it’s time to fully unleash Storm Shadow and then, if perhaps a little later, long-range ATACMS missiles.

What we can safely disregard is the pretext of Iran allegedly shipping short-range ballistic missiles to Russia. It’s either simply untrue or irrelevant. Tehran denies the American claim. Those ready to scoff at that should recall that the West has a rock-solid record of making things up, from Iraqi WMDs to Israel’s legally strictly non-existing ‘right’ to defend itself against those it occupies and genocides. And even if Iran has handed over missiles – as, by the way, it would have an actual right to do as a sovereign state – that is not why this specific Western escalation is occurring now. The real reason why the restrictions on the use of Western missiles are coming off at this point in the war is that Kiev is even more desperate than usual. With Russia first containing Kiev’s Kursk Kamikaze incursion and now launching devastating counter-attacks, the Ukrainian operation has turned into the bloody waste it was destined to be, while Moscow’s forces are accelerating their advances elsewhere, as even the stalwartly pro-Kiev New York Times is admitting.

Not that adding deeper missile strikes will save the Zelensky regime from defeat and probably collapse. For one thing, Ukraine does not have a large supply of these weapons, and given Western politics and lack of production capacities, it never will. Kiev may get lucky and do some limited damage, but – as with earlier silver bullets – the missiles cannot change the course of the war. Russian countermeasures will greatly blunt their impact in any case. But the Zelensky regime has a habit of clinging to one straw after the other. And, in addition, Zelensky’s team is pursuing its usual double strategy of seeking spectacular attacks that can feed propaganda at home and abroad, as well as perhaps finally escalate the war into an open regional, that is European, or even global conflict. For that apocalyptic escalation is Kiev’s last – if insane and suicidal – chance of staving off defeat.

Leave nothing for the Russian victors, not even people.

• Is the West Attempting to Destroy Kiev Demographically? (Miles)

Millions of Ukrainian citizens speak Russian and maintain political sympathies towards Moscow. Is the West working to prevent them from becoming reintegrated with their historical motherland? Russia’s proposed European security agreement in December 2021, bombastically referred to by Western sources as an “ultimatum,” represented one final good faith attempt on the part of Moscow to foreclose the possibility of war with Ukraine. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs published two draft treaties seeking to halt NATO’s steady march eastward. The military alliance has provoked concern in Moscow since its establishment in 1949 and especially since the ascension of West Germany to the bloc in 1955, which spurred the creation of the Warsaw Pact. The Warsaw Pact was famously dissolved as the Cold War drew to a close in 1991 but NATO – anchored by the reunified German state responsible for the 20th century murder of 27 million Soviet citizens – lives on, expanding its influence and territorial reach every few years.

“I would really like to see some documents from that [June 2021] summit in Geneva between Putin and Biden, because I think something happened there to trigger the Russian action towards proposing that security agreement in December of 2021 and preparing for the possibility of an armed conflict,” said Serbian-American journalist and translator Nebojsa Malic. The analyst joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program Thursday to share a provocative theory about the US-backed Ukraine proxy war on Russia. “Something was said at that summit that nobody’s talking about, but I’m very, very curious,” said Malic, referring to the final meeting between the Russian and American heads of state before the outbreak of the proxy conflict. “Why are they doing this? I had a somewhat off-the-wall theory a couple of days ago that it all goes back to the [hypothesis] of [former US National Security Advisor] Zbigniew Brzezinski and his whole theory that without Ukraine, Russia can’t be an empire.”

“Everybody assumed that this meant territory,” the journalist continued. “But what if Washington has actually realized that Ukraine can’t possibly win this and never could and are basically trying to deny Russia Ukraine as a resource – both land, oil riches, resources, whatever – but most importantly people.” “What if the actual endgame is making sure that Ukraine is wiped out demographically?” The true number of Ukrainian troops lost over 30 months of fighting has remained obscured in mainstream media as Kiev wages a propaganda war to attempt to maintain the support of the Western public. But analysis earlier this year placed Kiev’s casualties at close to half a million, a number that has only grown since Russian Defense Ministry Sergei Shoigu expounded on the subject in April. Observers say the war is possibly the bloodiest the world has seen in decades as Western countries continue to fund the anti-Russia crusade.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian civilians have suffered an epidemic of drowning deaths as citizens attempt to escape the draft by swimming to freedom across the country’s border with Romania and Hungary. Malic suggested the elimination of an entire generation of Ukrainians is not a tragic but unavoidable consequence of the war for Western military planners, but rather the point of the war, with the protracted conflict robbing Moscow of the human capital otherwise gained by its liberation of eastern regions. “This is an incredibly cynical and sinister perspective,” Malic conceded. “But… when you eliminate the impossible, anything else, no matter how improbable, must be the truth. Because that’s the only explanation that comes to my mind at this stage, because they are either complete imbeciles and are literally fighting a completely unwinnable war, or they figure out the war has been unwinnable and their objective is to actually have no more Ukrainians at maximum and bleed the Russians.”

“..a “common and indivisible architecture of strategic security and a fair polycentric world order.”

• BRICS, The Rise Of China And The Concept Of “Security” (Pepe Escobar)

The first meeting of security experts/National Security Advisors under the expanded BRICS+ format at the Konstantinovsky Palace in St. Petersburg unveiled quite a few nuggets. Let’s start with China. Foreign Minister Wang Yi proposed four BRICS-centric security initiatives. Essentially, BRICS+ – and beyond, considering further expansion – should aim at peaceful coexistence; independence; autonomy; and true multilateralism, which implies a rejection of Exceptionalism. At the BRICS table, the overarching theme was how member-nations should support each other despite so many challenges – mostly unleashed by you-know-who. On India, Secretary of the Russian Security Council Sergei Shoigu, meeting with Indian National Security Adviser Ajit Doval, stressed the strength of the alliance, “confidently standing the test of time”.

The larger context was in fact offered in parallel, in Switzerland, at the Geneva Center for Security Policy, by the always delightful Foreign Minister S.Jaishankar: “There was a club called G7, but you wouldn’t let anybody else into it – so we said, we’d go and form our own club (…) It’s actually a very interesting group because if you look at it, typically any club or any group has either a geographical contiguity or some common historical experience or a very strong economic connect.” But with BRICS what stands out is “big countries rising in the international system.” Cut to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, stressing how Russia and Brazil “have similar approaches to key international issues”, emphasizing how Moscow cherishes the current “bilateral mutual understanding and interaction, including in the light of the simultaneous presidencies of BRICS and G20 this year.”

In 2024, Russia presides over BRICS while Brazil presides over the G20. President Putin, apart from addressing the meeting, had bilaterals with all the top players. Putin noted how 34 nations “have already expressed their desire to join the activities of our association in one form or another.” Meeting with Wang Yi, Putin stressed that the Russia-China strategic partnership is in favor of a just world order, a principle supported by the Global South. Wang Yi confirmed President Xi Jinping has already accepted the official Russian invitation for the BRICS summit next month in Kazan. Putin also met with the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Ahmadian.

Putin confirmed he is expecting Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for another visit to Russia, apart from the BRICS summit, to sign their new strategic partnership agreement. Geoeconomics is key. The development of the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) was confirmed as a top Russia-Iran priority. Shoigu for his part confirmed, “We are ready to expand cooperation between our security councils.” The deal will be signed by both Presidents soon. Moreover, Shoigu added that Iran’s entry into BRICS advances cooperation among members to form a “common and indivisible architecture of strategic security and a fair polycentric world order.”

“Discrediting official, immutable narratives, such as the one about 11 September, remains the ultimate taboo. But a false narrative construct cannot hold out forever..”

• The Fake ‘War On Terror’ Collapses (Pepe Escobar)

The events of 11 September 2001 were intended to impose and enshrine a new Exceptionalist paradigm on the young 21st century. History, though, ruled otherwise. Cast as an attack on the US Homeland, 11 September 2001, immediately generated the Global War on Terror (GWOT), launched at 11 pm on the same day. Initially christened “The Long War” by the Pentagon, the term was later sanitized by the administration of Barack Obama as “Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).” The US-manufactured War on Terror spent a notoriously un-trackable eight trillion dollars defeating a phantom enemy, killed over half a million people – overwhelmingly Muslims – and branched out into illegal wars against seven Muslim-majority states. All of this was relentlessly justified on “humanitarian grounds” and allegedly supported by the “international community” – before that term, too, was renamed as the “rules-based international order.”

Cui Bono? (who stands to gain) remains the paramount question related to all matters related to 11 September 2001. A tight network of fervently Israel-first neocons strategically positioned across the defense and national security establishments by Vice President Dick Cheney – who had served as secretary of defense in the administration of George W Bush’s father – sprang into action to impose the long-planned agenda of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). That far-reaching agenda had waited in the wings for the right trigger – a “new Pearl Harbor” – to justify a slew of regime-change operations and wars across much of West Asia and other Muslim states, reshaping global geopolitics for the benefit of Israel.

US General Wesley Clark’s notorious revelation of a secret Cheney regime plot to destroy seven major Islamic countries over five years, from Iraq, Syria, and Libya all the way to Iran, showed us that the planning had already been done in advance. These targeted nations had one thing in common: they were resolute enemies of the occupation state and firm supporters of Palestinian rights. The sweet deal, from Tel Aviv’s perspective, was that the War on Terror would have the US and its western allies fighting all these serial Israeli-profiting wars on behalf of “civilization” and against the “barbarians.” The Israelis couldn’t have been more happy or smug about the direction this was going. It’s no wonder that 7 October 2023 is a mirror image of 11 September 2001. The occupation state itself advertised this as Israel’s own “11 September.” Parallels abound in more ways than one, but certainly not in the way Israel-firsters and the cabal of extremists leading Tel Aviv expected.

[..] The western Hegemon excels in constructing narratives and is currently wallowing in the Russophobia, Iranophobia, and Sinophobia swamps of its own creation. Discrediting official, immutable narratives, such as the one about 11 September, remains the ultimate taboo. But a false narrative construct cannot hold out forever. Three years ago, on the 20th anniversary of the Twin Towers collapsing and the onset of the War on Terror, we witnessed a great unraveling in the intersection of Central and South Asia: the Taliban were back in power, celebrating their victory over the Hegemon in a discombobulated Forever War. By then, the “seven countries in five years” obsession – aiming to forge a “New Middle East” – was being derailed across the spectrum. Syria was the turning point, though some would argue that the tea leaves were already cast when the Lebanese resistance defeated Israel in 2000, then again in 2006. But smashing independent Syria would have paved the way for the Hegemon – and Israel’s – Holy Grail: regime change in Iran.

“Without those resources they’re going to be in really, really big trouble.”

• Israel Exists to Help West Loot, Dominate Middle East (Miles)

Although modern defenders of Israel justify its existence under the pretense of “Jewish self-determination” or “decolonization,” the state’s ideological forebears clearly articulated Zionism as a colonial project. Issued by the British government in 1917, the Balfour Declaration is often considered to mark the beginning of Western support for the establishment of the modern state of Israel. The pronouncement, notorious among Palestinians and their supporters, committed the United Kingdom to the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people” in the Levant. Some Zionists viewed the creation of Israel as a progressive act necessary to combat rising prejudice in Europe, but historians have pointed out the nakedly antisemitic motivations of Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, who sought to appease a British public wary of rising Jewish immigration to the UK.

Although the West has cloaked its support for Israel in the decades since in the language of liberal antiracism its motivations are far from altruistic, argues political activist Joti Brar. The vice chair of the Communist Party of Great Britain, Marxist Leninist joined Sputnik’s The Critical Hour program Thursday to discuss the United States’ ironclad backing of the country as it continues its deadly military operation in the besieged Gaza Strip. “We see the desperation, despite the fact that this genocide is going on in the full glare of public scrutiny,” said Brar. “The balance of power has totally shifted away from them… And therefore, if they want to survive, they’ve got to find another way forward.” “But the truth is, another way forward can’t be found because as far as the truth about Israel is concerned, Israel is an outpost of Anglo-American imperialism in the Middle East to control the region’s resources,” she continued. “They need that there. It’s their armed base in the middle of the Arab world to control the Arab world and to be able to keep the loot flowing.”

Although modern defenders of Israel justify its existence under the pretense of “Jewish self-determination” or “decolonization,” the state’s ideological forebears clearly articulated Zionism as a colonial project. “You are being invited to help make history,” wrote the ideology’s founder Theodor Herzl in a 1902 letter to Cecil Rhodes, the notorious namesake of the white supremacist African republic of Rhodesia. “It doesn’t involve Africa, but a piece of Asia Minor; not Englishmen but Jews… How, then, do I happen to turn to you since this is an out-of-the-way matter for you? How indeed? Because it is something colonial.” Jewish migration to Palestine rose sharply after the Balfour Declaration was issued, with violent paramilitary gangs arising from within the transplanted population. Terrorist groups such as Lehi and Irgun attacked the country’s indigenous Palestinian population, forming the basis of the Israel Defense [sic]

Forces after the establishment of the ethno-supremacist state in 1948. Israel has pushed the territory’s non-Jewish inhabitants to the margins since then, presiding over what numerous international organizations have classified as an apartheid state. “Oil remains the single most important commodity in the world today,” noted Brar. “It is the most important source of energy for the world, for industry and for war and it is the most geopolitically significant asset for that reason. And without controlling the oil and being able to loot it at rock bottom prices in the way that they do because of their colonial position in the region, then imperialism would be in massive trouble. What’s left of their economies would be collapsing.”

“And so you see this really existential identification of Western imperialism with Israel, which to a lot of people seems to make no sense. They can’t see why they don’t just let Israel fight its own battles and fight and die or live and die according to its own abilities. Why are they all jumping in? Why is Zionism so important to the West?” “The reason is it’s their tool for controlling the region and the region’s resources,” Brar explained. “Without those resources they’re going to be in really, really big trouble.”

“The abortion issue was created by a liberal US Supreme Court that declared a right that does not exist in the US Constitution..”

• The Abortion Issue (Paul Craig Roberts)

Perhaps nothing demonstrates the presstitutes’ idiocy, ignorance, and incompetence [more] than the media’s presentation of the abortion issue as a presidential issue with Kamala standing with women and Trump standing against women. The abortion issue has nothing whatsoever to do with the executive branch. The abortion issue was created by a liberal US Supreme Court that declared a right that does not exist in the US Constitution. A liberal Court ruled in favor of sexually promiscuous women who do not want the responsibility for their own sexual behavior, and gave them the right to terminate birth. A subsequent US Supreme Court repealed the previous Court’s decision for the reason that the creation of a right to abortion was a legislative act, not a judicial one. In overturning the previous Court’s finding of an abortion right, the subsequent Court said abortion was a legislative issue for state legislatures, a position with which Trump agrees, and that the judiciary has no Constitutional authority to legislate as the US Supreme Court had done in its abortion ruling.

What Trump is supporting is the separation of powers. If sexually promiscuous liberal and left-wing women who decry responsibility for their sexual behavior want the right to terminate the birth of a person, they will have to convince the legislators in the state governments. It is not a federal issue and in no way a presidential issue. Yet, the despicable whore American media featured it as a presidential issue in the “debate.” So why was it part of the media orchestrated “debate” between Trump and Kamala? The only answer is: to give the women’s vote to Kamala. The question that needs explaining is: Why is it that the presstitute media is given control over presidential “debates?” Especially “debates” held in controlled and sealed rooms devoid of an audience. A debate should be a public affair attended by the public and one that all media can cover if so inclined. How do we explain debates controlled by biased media assigned the task of protecting official explanations and never challenging them?

The answer is to keep Americans from understanding what has happened over the course of the life of their country to their country and to their Constitutional rights. The separation of powers that the Constitution prescribes endeavors to keep people, not government, in charge. What has happened over time, is the destruction of the peoples’ rights. It began with Lincoln destroying the 10th Amendment and states’ rights. Next came the expansion of the franchise to include non-property owners given the right to vote to themselves the property of others. Then Roosevelt’s New Deal turned Congress’ legislative authority over to executive branch regulatory agencies. Then with George W. Bush and Obama declaring their right based on suspicion alone of setting aside the Constitution’s prohibition against throwing people into dungeons without presentation of evidence to a court and conviction in a trial and the Constitution’s prohibition against execution of life without due process of law, the executive branch emerged more powerful than the US Constitution.

Everyone accepted these extraordinary violations of the US Constitution, including Congress, bar associations, the university law schools, and media.The American people themselves are so poorly educated, thanks to public schools that the insouciant fools support and money-driven universities that they have no realization of the Constitution’s burial along with American liberty, which, of course, means them. They sit there thinking they are a free people while a gulag is being prepared for them. As is evident, abortion is not the only issue about which Americans are hoodwinked. For most Americans, their existence is organized for them by controlled narratives. Following the media’s instruction, they regard those who tell them the truth as “conspiracy theorists.” The suppression of truth has always been easy in America, but in the 21st century it has become total. Today truth itself is being criminalized and so are those who express truth.

Today persons, such as Dimitri Simes, who give their honest opinions about events that are transpiring, as well as social media, such as Telegraph and X , are under attack for spreading harmful “false information.” Even the owners of social media companies where people express their opinions are being held accountable for the opinions expressed by the people and for the use of social media to “abet their crimes.” Pavel Durov, Telegram founder, has been detained in France on spurious charges that he is responsible for crimes committed by users of Telegram. Elon Musk is threatened both by the EU and the UK police commissioner with arrest if he fails to censor his interview on X with Donald Trump. If you look at this honestly, the Western world today compares unfavorably with Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia. Today there is far more freedom of expression in Russia, China, and Iran than in the West.

Think about what this means. It is impossible to raise and discuss a serious issue such as Washington’s provocations of Russia, China, and Iran. How many Americans or any persons in the Western world are there who are not so stupid as to think that Ukraine’s totally artificial borders are worth a nuclear war? Is there anyone in the Western world who is not so utterly stupid and compromised as to think that Israel’s destruction of Palestine in the interest of Greater Israel is anything less than the worst war crime in human history? How do we explain Netanyahu, the genocider of Palestine, receiving 53 standing ovations from the US Congress? And it was Christian Evangelicals leading the applause. So, you see, it is not merely the abortion issue about which Americans are incapable of thought. They are incapable of though about any the the issues that are destroying them.

Dolphin
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834702397891060058

Skater

Cabbage (aka Bai Cai) is a white French Bulldog who has mesmerized the Internet by skating like an absolute pro.

No wonder that some are calling him “Tony Dawg”.

His owner, Zhao Chen, who is also a skater, began training him in 2020.pic.twitter.com/F1KtBKsbUm

— Massimo (@Rainmaker1973) September 14, 2024

No stick

“ No stick, no problem”
pic.twitter.com/s9I9OMlhSm

— Science girl (@gunsnrosesgirl3) September 14, 2024

Rhino spot
https://twitter.com/i/status/1834938697327825390

Bartiromo

I think one of the hardest things in life is witnessing our parents get older.

Not only is @MariaBartiromo handling it beautifully, I think she’s an incredibly inspiring example of true love when it comes to caring for our parents. ❤️ #sagesteeleshow pic.twitter.com/cx51ycMDIz

— Sage Steele (@sagesteele) September 13, 2024

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