Jan 122025
 


René Magritte The victory 1939

 

Trump Starts Governing Early From His Palm Beach Shadow White House (Whedon)
Trump To Sign Around 100 Executive Orders Upon Taking Office (ZH)
Trump Admin Prepares Response to Starmer’s Election Interference (Ferguson)
Something Is Rotten In The State Of Starmer (Milbank)
Trump’s ‘Crazy’ Ideas Not So Crazy After All (Kadish)
Meloni: Soros Is Interfering In Democracies, Not Musk (RMX)
Musk Bought Twitter To “Destroy The Woke Mind Virus” (RT)
Trump To Place Investments In A Trust During Presidency (JTN)
Special Counsel Jack Smith Resigns (RT)
Merchan’s Frankenstein Monster (Turley)
House Judiciary Expected To Continue Hunter Biden Probe Despite Pardon (JTN)
CIA Can Read WhatsApp Messages – Zuckerberg (RT)
We Were Censored By Meta; We’re Taking Them to the Supreme Court (CHD)
US Playing ‘Fool’s Game’ By Ignoring Russia’s Red Lines – Peter Kuznick (RT)
AfD Delegates Reject Motion Condemning Putin (RT)
Why Was Pacific Palisades Reservoir EMPTY? It Gets Worse. (Victoria Taft)

 

 

 

 

No punishment

Maher

Watters

 

 

 

 

The ground running.

Trump Starts Governing Early From His Palm Beach Shadow White House (Whedon)

President-elect Donald Trump’s past few months have been unusually busy for an incoming president and have seen him notch key agenda wins before even returning to office. With President Joe Biden essentially absent from the public eye, Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate has taken on the role of a shadow White House, from which he has begun to operate a sort of pre-presidential administration. Foreign dignitaries, domestic politicians, and billionaire investors alike have flocked to the Palm Beach resort to meet with the incoming president, some of whom have brought with them economic and/or ideological offerings. His reach has extended well beyond the confines of his compound, reverberating across allied nations while he and his surrogates work to seemingly push out opposition figures leading key American partners. Here’s a look at his biggest moves while waiting to reclaim the Oval Office:

Outgoing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speedily traveled to Mar-a-Lago after Trump floated the possibility of imposing tariffs on the country. The meeting was widely panned in Canadian media and even led to comedic skits depicting Trudeau eating a Big Mac without the use of his hands at Trump’s behest. The president-elect’s subsequent retorts referring to Trudeau as the “governor” of Canada further belittled his status in the eyes of the Canuck electorate. Already struggling in the polls, Trump’s proposition of making Canada the 51st state seems to have helped fuel Trudeau’s already significant decline in public opinion and he subsequently announced his plans to resign once the Liberal Party selected his replacement.

Trump notched a major win on digital censorship when Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg announced the platform would end its partnerships with fact-checking organizations and instead switch to a user-driven correction system similar to X’s community notes. The move followed a late November meeting at Mar-a-Lago between Zuckerberg and Trump. Facebook was one of the major platforms that banned Trump in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, incident at the U.S. Capitol, though it later restored his accounts. In December, Facebook parent company Meta donated $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund. Google and Boeing this week each donated $1 million to the same fund, helping the pot reach a record $170 million. Amazon Executive Chairman Jeff Bezos, moreover, congratulated Trump on his comeback and later met with him at Mar-a-Lago as well. The owner of the Washington Post prevented the left-wing outlet from issuing an endorsement in the 2024 election. He has further worked to tone down the outlet’s anti-Trump bias in the wake of the election.

Trump’s victory evidently signaled to some Democrats that the public favors some of key policies, namely on reducing the size of government and cracking down on illegal immigration. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., made headlines this week with plans to visit Mar-a-Lago at Trump’s request. Fetterman has developed a reputation as a moderate willing to work with Republicans and co-sponsored the “Laken Riley Act” in the Senate, which would require the detention of illegal immigrants accused of a wide array of crimes. That bill passed the House this week and cleared a procedural hurdle in the upper chamber. It is expected to pass the Senate and reach the president’s desk in time for Trump’s inauguration. “I think it’s pretty reasonable that if the president would like to have a conversation — or invite someone to have a conversation — to have it. And no one is my gatekeeper.”

He also appears to have found an ally in Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., who in December joined the DOGE Caucus, a group of lawmakers dedicated to working with Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). “The Caucus should look at the bureaucracy that the DHS has become and include recommendations to make Secret Service and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] independent federal agencies with a direct report to the White House,” Moskowitz said of the bloc. Trump notched two multi-billion dollar investment deals with foreign companies during his transition, including from SoftBank and DAMAC Properties, which pledged $100 billion and $20 billion investments in the U.S., respectively. DAMAC Chairman Hussain Sajwani and SoftBank Group CEO Masayoshi Son both visited Mar-a-Lago and announced their investments in joint press conferences with Trump.

The incoming president used the DAMAC conference to highlight his pledge to help clear administrative red tape for foreign investors as an incentive to do business in the U.S. “And I made it a point of telling people, if you invest a billion dollars or more, and we’ll do this for people with far less too, but we guarantee it, we’re going to move them quickly through the environmental process,” he said this week. Trump has also used the transition period to unveil an ambitious foreign policy agenda that includes the acquisition of foreign territory, including at the expense of treaty allies. He has vowed to use economic coercion to reclaim the Panama Canal and acquire Canada and Greenland. He further said he wouldn’t rule out military force to take Greenland or the Canal Zone. Denmark currently maintains official control over Greenland and is a member of NATO, as is Canada.

When pressed on whether he would rule out a military seizure, he told reporters that “I’m not going to commit to that now, it might, it might be that you’ll have to do something. Look, the Panama Canal is vital to our country.” Trump has insisted that Panama, which purchased the canal zone for $1 dollar under President Jimmy Carter, has repeatedly violated the terms of the agreement by overcharging American ships for passage and allowing the Chinese government to exert control over the critical waterway. The president-elect has insisted that the United States needs the Panama Canal and Greenland “for economic security.” “The Panama Canal was built for our military,” he added during a press conference in Palm Beach, Fla. Donald Trump Jr. visited Greenland this week along with Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk in a highly publicized trip that saw them tour the area and meet with locals.

Read more …

There will be surprises.

Trump To Sign Around 100 Executive Orders Upon Taking Office (ZH)

President-elect Donald Trump will sign around 100 executive orders as soon as he takes office, according to Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK). Mullin did not go into details, however Trump has previously said he would sign a variety of border and immigration-related EOs following his second inauguration, including a national emergency over illegal immigration – and rolling back ‘climate agenda’ regulations surrounding drilling for oil and natural gas. “I will sign Day One orders to end all Biden restrictions on energy production, terminate his insane electric vehicle mandate, cancel his natural gas export ban, reopen ANWR in Alaska—the biggest site, potentially anywhere in the world—and declare a national energy emergency,” Trump said in December.

According to Trump transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt, “The American people can bank on President Trump using his executive power on day one to deliver on the promises he made to them on the campaign trail.” Bloomberg reports that Trump will put a hiring freeze on the government, and mandate that federal employees return to the office for in-person work, a position pushed by billionaire Elon Musk as part of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). In recent weeks, the Trump team has been working behind-the-scenes to make sure its initial months are as productive as possible.

“While chief of staff Susie Wiles has said she views the first 100 days as an artificial metric, she and the entire Trump team see the first two years — before midterm elections could imperil Republican majorities in the House and Senate — as the best opportunity for the term-limited incoming president to achieve his sweeping goals”. -Bloomberg. That said, as Mullin noted further in an appearance on Fox & Friends, EOs can easily be undone by future administrations. “As he said, it’s not permanent,” said Mullin. “I would like reconciliation so we can start making this stuff into legislation, so we can move forward.” “The president was very clear, he wants results,” Mullin continued. “He said he can wait if we can do one big, beautiful bill. He’d like to have one big, beautiful, beautiful bill. But if the House were to get bogged down, maybe we have to divide it up in two.”

As the Epoch Times notes, the senator was making reference to comments made by Trump this week after he met with Republicans in Washington. “I think there’s a lot of talk about two [bills], and there’s a lot of talk about one (bill), but it doesn’t matter,” Trump told reporters. “The end result is the same,” he said, adding that his meeting with GOP lawmakers showed the party is ”unified.” Mullin added that Republicans need to “deliver for the American people on securing the border, on energy independence, on getting the regulations rolled back and making sure that we have taxes that are permanent, so we don’t have a $4 trillion tax increase on the American people right now.”

Read more …

X thread.

Trump Admin Prepares Response to Starmer’s Election Interference (Ferguson)

In an unprecedented twist in global politics, the Trump administration is rumored to be preparing a dramatic response to revelations of foreign interference in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. With undeniable proof surfacing that UK Labour leader Keir Starmer allegedly orchestrated a covert operation involving 100 staffers to support Donald Trump’s rival, Kamala Harris, the political landscape has been shaken to its core. As Donald Trump triumphantly prepares to return to the White House, insiders close to the administration suggest that his approach to this betrayal could mark a turning point in U.S.-UK relations. The weight of the evidence reportedly leaves no room for doubt: this was not just meddling—it was a calculated assault on American democracy. And now, Trump may be ready to wield the full force of the presidency to hold the Starmer government accountable.

Extreme Measures on the Table Behind closed doors, discussions are said to be taking place within the Trump inner circle. Options under consideration range from economic sanctions targeting Starmer’s allies to severe diplomatic actions that could isolate the UK on the world stage. One unnamed senior advisor was quoted as saying, “This isn’t just politics—it’s treason against the American people. The response will be swift and decisive.” Whispers of even more drastic measures have surfaced, with some speculating that the administration may seek an international tribunal to prosecute Starmer for violating U.S. election integrity. Others suggest that covert operations to destabilize the Labour-led UK government could be on the table, a stark reminder that the Trump presidency is unafraid to take bold action when American sovereignty is at stake.

The End of the ‘Special Relationship’?This scandal threatens to unravel the longstanding “special relationship” between the United States and the United Kingdom. Trump, a known advocate of strong nationalist policies, could view this betrayal as the ultimate affront to American independence and might use it to justify a dramatic recalibration of the alliance. Sources close to the administration say Trump has already warned of “serious consequences” during private conversations, leaving the Starmer government scrambling to contain the fallout. Starmer’s alleged interference, if confirmed, could not only undermine his credibility at home but also plunge the UK into political chaos. Already, opposition voices in Parliament are calling for investigations into Starmer’s actions, fearing repercussions that could devastate Britain’s economy and its standing on the world stage.

A Warning to All Foreign Leaders By making an example of Starmer, Trump could send a stark message to any foreign leader contemplating interference in U.S. elections: no one is beyond the reach of American justice. The world is watching as the Trump administration crafts its response, knowing that the actions taken in the coming weeks could set a precedent for how the U.S. deals with foreign adversaries.

A New Era of Retribution This unfolding drama signals a new era in international politics, where foreign meddling in American elections is met with fierce and uncompromising retaliation. As Trump prepares to step back into the Oval Office, one thing is clear: the rules of the game have changed, and the cost of betrayal has never been higher. The stage is set for an international showdown, and the Starmer government may soon find itself in the crosshairs of an administration determined to defend American democracy at all costs. As the world holds its breath, one question looms: how far is Donald Trump willing to go to settle the score?

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878009896832049281

Read more …

I think he himself is rotten. This kind of “it’s everyone’s fault” and “it ain’t so bad” is precisely what’s wrong.

Something Is Rotten In The State Of Starmer (Milbank)

Elon Musk, and a host of other critics, have been going after Keir Starmer for his and Jess Phillips’ decision to refuse a national inquiry into the grooming gangs in Oldham. Keir Starmer is furiously angry about the grooming scandal. Unfortunately, what he is mostly angry about seems to be those attacking his record, rather than the rape gangs. Before we get to what was wrong with his response, and there was a great deal, we should first understand where he and his supporters are coming from. Musk is ill-informed, unconcerned with the truth and making reckless assertions, and he is doing so from a massive social media platform, on the eve of his becoming an official in the US government. Musk and his allies have attacked Starmer and Jess Phillips, both of whom believe they have taken a substantive role in fighting against sexual abuse.

From inside No 10, the situation feels desperately unfair, and manipulated by an irresponsible right wing press and social media. Labour refused a national inquiry into abuse in Oldham, instead encouraging the council to hold its own, as many others had already done so with some success. In this judgement, they were backed by none other than Professor Alexis Jay, who led the previous national inquiry in 2015, and who argues that another inquiry will just delay justice and vitally needed reforms. The government says they are intent on implementing her recommendations, and point out that much of the inaction happened on the watch of the Conservative Party. Labour allies understandably wonder where this anger on the issue has been for the last ten years, when the Conservatives were at the helm, and in a position to do something about it.

From Labour’s perspective, the issue they are handling responsibly is being turned into a cynical political football by a Right that cares little about white working class girls, and quite a lot about using migration to rack up votes. Reform, led by Nigel Farage, has been unrelenting online and in the press condemning Keir Starmer personally. Robert Jenrick attacked the culture of British Pakistanis in a statement that so offended the political Left that the leader of the Lib Dems called on him to resign. Aside from divisive language, an amendment mandating a national inquiry was added by the Tories to the children’s wellbeing and schools bill, which Labour says could kill the legislation and endanger children.

You can see why Labour feels it needs to be combative and set the record straight. Unfortunately, this approach is a catastrophic error of political judgment, and reveals severe moral failings in Starmer’s approach to leadership. Put aside the wild exaggerations bandied about online, and forget about the sickening tussle in Westminster to lay the blame at a rival party’s door. What actually matters here? The truth, public safety, and justice for victims. In this situation Starmer isn’t the former head of the CPS, he isn’t even the leader of the Labour Party — he is the leader of this country, and the representative of the British crown. The grooming gang scandal touches every political party and level of government. Police, courts, social workers, local councils, and the national government all failed victims, and many colluded in their victimisation.

The seriousness of Musk’s claims, which millions of people saw, needed to be addressed, but ultimately Musk is a private individual living in America, making these allegations on social media. A simple statement setting the record straight from a spokesperson was all that it merited, and the Prime Minister personally responding was wildly disproportionate. For all that Musk is an adolescent throwing fuel on the fire of British politics, he is also a father and a human being encountering, probably for the first time, reports of the British police allowing thousands of children to be raped and, in at least one case, killed, out of a fear of appearing racist. His untruths and half truths are unforgivably irresponsible from the owner of a social media company, but his anger was entirely legitimate.

Read more …

Canada, Panama, Greenland, it all makes a lot of sense from an American point of View.

Trump’s ‘Crazy’ Ideas Not So Crazy After All (Kadish)

Why is it that people are always calling for someone to think “outside the box,” then when someone does, say, “Aaaak! He thought outside the box!” In that view, President-elect Donald J. Trump has already committed (at least) three heresies: Buy Greenland, stop China from controlling the Panama Canal and deepen America’s affiliation with Canada. All three ideas are neither crazy nor even new. President Harry S. Truman looked at acquiring Greenland in 1946. Thomas Jefferson, after the Louisiana Purchase, proposed buying Cuba – just think how the Cubans would be prospering now, politically and economically, if that deal had gone through. Those acquisitions didn’t take place but in 1917, the US did acquire Denmark’s Virgin Islands for $25 million.

As historian Stephen Press writes, “As secretary of state, John Quincy Adams arranged debt relief for Spain in exchange for Florida. Secretary of State William Seward acquired Alaska. “What Mr. Trump proposes is consistent with this American tradition—and with our current borders. Sovereignty purchases are responsible for more than 40% of U.S. land… “History suggests the benefits of being open-minded about this. Inhabitants of Alaska wouldn’t be better off under Russian sovereignty. Bringing Greenlanders into closer affiliation with the U.S., and sweetening the deal with economic subsidies, could conceivably prove beneficial to all parties” As for the Panama Canal, President Jimmy Carter handed it to Panama for $1, but on the condition that it permanently remain a neutral zone – not one controlled at both ends by China.

“We gave the Panama Canal to Panama,” Trump has pointed out. “We didn’t give it to China. They’ve abused that gift.” The US built the Panama Canal in the first place to be able to avoid having commercial and military sea traffic avoid the long journey around South America’s southernmost sea route, the Strait of Magellan – where the Chinese Communist Party also located a base. If there were to be a conflict with Communist China, it would be easy enough for them to block the Canal to U.S. use. As China expert Gordon G. Chang has pointed out: “China’s port facilities are at both ends of the canal. And when Gen. Laura Richardson took a helicopter ride over the Canal Zone, this was the middle of 2022; she said she ‘looked down and saw all of these dual-use facilities.’ … at a time of war, they could make the canal totally useless…. They say that we have a two-ocean Navy. Well, we would have two separate navies. It’d be very difficult to get ships from the Atlantic to the Pacific, or vice versa.”

Closer ties with Canada, as Trump appears to see them, would make a united-in-some-way North America a formidable landmass to any would-be adversary. “You get rid of that artificially drawn line,” Trump stated, “and you take a look at what that looks like, and it would also be much better for national security. Don’t forget, we protect Canada.” Trump seems to have been merely responding to the opening provided him by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, days before the latter announced that he would be resigning. According to Trump:

“I said what would happen if we didn’t do it. He said Canada would dissolve. Canada wouldn’t be able to function, if we didn’t take their 20% of our car market… So, I said to him, well, why are we doing it? He said, I don’t really know. He was unable to answer the question, but I can answer it. We’re doing it because of habit, and we’re doing it because we like our neighbors, and we’ve been good neighbors. But we can’t do it forever and it’s a tremendous amount of money. And why should we have a $200 billion deficit and add on to that many, many other things that we give them in terms of subsidy?” Trump has also announced a “Made in America,” tax break incentive for investment in the US, and a “Golden Age of America.” It seems to have begun already — and he is not even president yet.

Read more …

“I never talked about this with Musk. It’s not my habit to use my public role to do favors to friends,” Meloni said.

“Is the problem that Elon Musk is influential and rich or that he is not left-wing?”

Meloni: Soros Is Interfering In Democracies, Not Musk (RMX)

At a press conference in Rome earlier this year, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni said that Elon Musk’s political posts on X do not pose a threat to democracy; while oligarch George Soros, however, continuously interferes in the politics of other nations, according to Italy’s leader. “The problem is when wealthy people use their resources to finance parties, associations and political exponents all over the world to influence the political choices of nation states”, Meloni told reporters at an annual press conference. “That’s not what Musk is doing,” she added. “Elon Musk financed an election campaign in his country, by his candidate, in a system in which, by the way, I would point out that this is quite common,” Meloni said. “But I am not aware of Elon Musk financing parties, associations or political exponents around the world. This, for example, is what George Soros does.”

“And yes, I consider that to be dangerous interference in the affairs of nation states and in their sovereignty,” she noted. Meloni also pointed to other wealthy people actively funding parties and NGOs around the world to influence local policies. “This is not the first time that famous and wealthy people have expressed their opinions. I have seen many such cases, often against me, and no one was offended then…” Musk, she said, is a very rich man who expresses his opinion and does not pose a threat to democracy. “Is the problem that Elon Musk is influential and rich or that he is not left-wing?” asked Meloni. She also noted that she and many others on the right are not financially dependent on Musk, unlike many on the left who are funded by Soros, or have been funded by him over the years. Meloni denied ever taking any money from Musk, “unlike those who have taken it from Soros”.

She also denied various media reports that her government is on the verge of signing a massive deal with Musk’s company SpaceX. However, even if that were true, signing a business deal is far different than receiving financial aid for political activities, which is behavior that Soros often partakes in with his beneficiaries. In response to a journalist’s question, Meloni also spoke about Elon Musk’s open support for the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD). Meloni stressed that if anyone tried to influence the Italian elections, it was Germany, under the then Social Democratic-Liberal-Green government. “I would like to remind you of the German side’s interference in the Italian election campaign,” Meloni said, referring to previous German concerns about the right-wing position she represented.

Soros has long been a controversial figure due to his outsized role in the politics of nations around the world, however, few on the left-liberal spectrum ever criticized this interference. Soros has also long called for the removal of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, with both figures antagonistic towards each other over the years.

Read more …

“In 2021, I set out to destroy the woke mind virus and now it has been deleted..”

Musk Bought Twitter To “Destroy The Woke Mind Virus” (RT)

X owner Elon Musk has said that he purchased the platform, then known as Twitter, in order to “destroy the woke mind virus.” Musk has blamed much of modern society’s ills on radical liberalism. “In 2021, I set out to destroy the woke mind virus and now it has been deleted,” Musk wrote on X on Saturday, after sharing a post he made in 2021 reading “traceroute woke_mind_virus.” A traceroute is a diagnostic command used to troubleshoot Internet Protocol networks. Asked by a follower if this was “the main reason you bought twitter?” Musk replied “Yes.”Musk has frequently lashed out against the “woke mind virus,” a catch-all term used by some conservatives to condemn radical liberal philosophies and policies including transgenderism, censorship, and the promotion of diversity in the workplace at the expense of merit.

In an interview with Canadian psychologist Dr. Jordan Peterson last July, Musk said that the “woke mind virus” killed his son, referring to his transgender child Xavier. Musk claimed that he was “tricked” by doctors into signing documents authorizing his son to undergo hormone treatment, which permanently sterilized him. “I lost my son, essentially. They call it deadnaming for a reason,” the billionaire said. “The reason it’s called deadnaming is because your son is dead. My son Xavier is dead, killed by the woke mind virus. I vowed to destroy the woke mind virus after that.” Musk purchased Twitter for $44 billion in 2022, rebranding the platform as X, firing most of its content moderation staff, and rolling back the majority of its censorship policies.

X was the first major social media platform to reinstate US President-elect Donald Trump’s account, which was suspended after his supporters rioted on Capitol Hill in January 2021. The platform’s overhaul initially made it an outlier, with most of its competitors maintaining their restrictive speech policies. However, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that his platforms – which include Facebook and Instagram – will dial back their moderation policies to “restore free expression” and will no longer work with third-party “fact checkers” to label political content. Alongside these planned changes, Meta ended its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) hiring programs this week, and according to the New York Times, removed tampons from men’s bathrooms in its offices, where they had been provided “for nonbinary and transgender employees.”

Read more …

Someone will find fault.

Trump To Place Investments In A Trust During Presidency (JTN)

The Trump Organization on Friday announced that President-elect Donald Trump will place his investments into a trust controlled by his children and will have limited access to the company during his presidency. The organization released a five-page ethics plan on Friday that included several of the adjustments the company will make while Trump works from the Oval Office. The organization has also hired a new ethics advisor to ensure the company meets and exceeds its ethical and legal obligations. The release comes 10 days before Trump is set to take office on January 20. The company said that Trump would not be consulted on most matters related to the business and would only receive “general business updates,” according to NBC News. The investments will also be managed independently by “outside financial institutions” that will not seek his input on specific holdings or transactions.

It also said the company “will not enter into any new material transactions or contracts with a foreign government, except for Ordinary Course Transactions,” but does not mention whether it would do business with any foreign private entities. The disclosure comes after the Trump Organization backed away from foreign business dealings following Trump’s first election in 2016. The company also said that it would donate all profits from foreign governments at its hotels and similar businesses to the U.S. Treasury Department, as it did in 2016, and offer discounted rates to members of the U.S. Secret Service and other government agencies that lodge at Trump hotels. The Trump Organization is largely operated by the Trump’s sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr., who are executive vice presidents.

Read more …

Time to go after him.

Special Counsel Jack Smith Resigns (RT)

US Special Counsel Jack Smith, who led two federal cases against President-elect Donald Trump, has resigned after handing in his final report on his findings, according to court documents lodged on Saturday. The prosecution filed a motion to urge District Judge Aileen Cannon not to extend her injunction temporarily blocking the release of a portion of the special counsel’s report pertaining to the classified documents case against Trump. News of Smith’s resignation from the US Justice Department came in a brief footnote in the court filing. “The Special Counsel completed his work and submitted his final confidential report on January 7, 2025, and separated from the Department on January 10,” the footnote said.

Judge Cannon presides over the mishandling of classified documents case against Trump. Her block on releasing Smith’s report on the case lasts until Monday. Attorney General Merrick Garland intends to publicly release the other part of Smith’s report – detailing his findings in the case of Trump’s alleged attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 US election, according to court documents released on Wednesday. Smith led two of the four criminal cases brought against Trump after his first presidency. Cannon dismissed the first case in July last year, while DC District Judge Tanya Chutkan dropped the second in November, citing legal immunity afforded a sitting US president.

Neither of the cases went to trial. Smith’s resignation comes just ten days before Trump takes office on January 20. The incoming president had said he would fire Smith “within two seconds” of assuming office. The president-elect has repeatedly stated that the charges against him are groundless and “lawless.” On Friday, Trump was sentenced in the ‘hush money’ case brought against him in New York. While the ruling means he will not face fines or jail time, Trump will be considered a felon under US law.

Read more …

The legal system is barely functioning anymore. The skin of Frankenstein’s teeth.

Merchan’s Frankenstein Monster (Turley)

This week, the sentencing of President-Elect Donald Trump saw one of the most impassioned defense arguments given at such a hearing in years . . . from the judge himself. Acting Justice Juan Merchan admitted that the case was “unique and remarkable” but insisted that “once the courtroom doors were closed, the trial itself was no more special, unique, and extraordinary than the other 32 cases in this courthouse.” If so, that is a chilling indictment of the entire New York court system. Merchan allowed a dead misdemeanor to be resuscitated by allowing Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to effectively prosecute declined federal offenses. He allowed a jury to convict Trump without any agreement, let alone unanimity, on what actually occurred in the case. Merchan ruled that the jury did not have to agree on why Trump committed an alleged offense in describing settlement costs as legal costs.

Neither the defendant nor the public will ever know what the jury ultimately found in its verdict. I once described this case as a legal Frankenstein: “It is the ultimate gravedigger charge, where Bragg unearthed a case from 2016 and, through a series of novel steps, is seeking to bring it back to life…Bragg is combining parts from both state and federal codes.” Even liberal legal experts have denounced the case and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) recently called it total “b—s–t.” Now, Merchan seemed to assure this Frankenstein case that he was just like any other creature of the court. It did not matter that he was stitched together from dead cases and zapped into life through lawfare. Merchan knows that there is a fair chance this monstrosity will finally die on appeal, and he was making the case for his own conduct. The verdict, however, is likely to last far longer than the Trump verdict.

It is a judgment against not just Merchan but the New York legal system, which allowed itself to be weaponized against political opponents. In the Mary Shelley novel, Frankenstein says “I am thy creature: I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel.” Trump can now appeal the case as a whole. Prior appeals in the New York court system were unsuccessful, and hopes are low that the system will redeem itself. However, Trump can eventually escape the vortex of the New York court system in search of jurists willing to see beyond the rage and bring reason to this case.

Notably, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass cited Chief Justice John Roberts in his argument before Merchan, noting that Roberts recently chastised those who attack the courts. (Roberts just the night before joined liberal justices and Justice Amy Coney Barrett in refusing to stay the sentencing). Steinglass portrayed Trump as an existential threat to the rule of law. Roberts, however, is everything that Merchan is not. You can disagree with him, but he has repeatedly ruled against his own preferred outcomes in cases, including rulings against President Trump and his campaign and Administration. For his part, Trump declined to criticize the court and declared that “This is a long way from finished and I respect the court’s opinion.” Indeed it is. Merchan’s monster will now go on the road and work its way back to the Supreme Court. Outside of New York this freak attraction will likely be viewed as less thrilling than chilling.

The election had the feel of the townspeople coming to the castle in the movie. In this case, however, the townspeople were right about what they saw in the making of a creature that threatened their very existence. Lawfare is that monster. It threatens us all, even those who hate Trump and his supporters. Once released, it spreads panic among the public which can no longer rely on the guarantees of blind and fair justice. That includes businesses who view this case and the equally absurd civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James as creating a dangerous and even lawless environment. Many are saying “but for the grace of God go I” in a system that allows for selective prosecution. In the sentencing proceeding, Merchan was downplaying his hand in creating this Frankenstein. However, the case is the fallen angel of the legal system. While heralded in court by Bragg’s office as the triumph of legal process, it is in fact the rawest and most grotesque form of lawfare. Many will be blamed as the creators of this monster but few will escape that blame, including Merchan himself.

Read more …

Hunter will have to talk. And under oath he can’t lie.

House Judiciary Expected To Continue Hunter Biden Probe Despite Pardon (JTN)

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan on Thursday indicated that he would keep the investigation into first son Hunter Biden going in the 119th Congress, even though President Joe Biden already pardoned him for all crimes committed in the past decade. The wide-ranging pardon was announced last month, and blamed Republicans for the reason he broke a promise he had made to voters. The pardon even forgives any theoretical crimes Hunter Biden may have committed when serving on the board of Burisma. President-elect Donald Trump has also threatened to go after his political adversaries after they allegedly targeted him in a series of court cases during the Biden administration.

Jordan said that one way the investigation can continue is by interviewing special counsel David Weiss, who ultimately recommended Hunter Biden be prosecuted on federal gun and tax evasion charges. Weiss was interviewed last year as part of the committee’s impeachment investigation into the president, per Politico. “We think we need to look at David Weiss, the special counsel,” Jordan said. “There will be some additional work we need to do, I think, there because when we deposed him, he wasn’t willing to — he didn’t answer any questions, really, because it was [an] ongoing investigation.”

The Judiciary committee also questioned Hunter Biden and Joe Biden’s brother, James Biden, in closed-door interviews last year regarding the impeachment inquiry. Jordan also declined to investigate the president’s pardon of his son, claiming that even though he did not support the decision, the president has proper authority to pardon whoever they like.

Read more …

“What they do is have access to your phone. So it doesn’t matter if anything’s encrypted, they could just see it in plain sight..”

CIA Can Read WhatsApp Messages – Zuckerberg (RT)

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has acknowledged that US authorities, including the CIA, can access WhatsApp messages by remotely logging into users’ devices, effectively bypassing the platform’s end-to-end encryption. Speaking on the Joe Rogan Experience podcast on Friday, Zuckerberg explained that while WhatsApp’s encryption prevents Meta from viewing message content, it does not protect against physical access to a user’s phone. His comments came in the context of a question by Rogan about Tucker Carlson’s quest to set up an interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In February last year, while speaking about finally succeeding in talking to Putin after three years of failed attempts, Carlson blamed the US authorities, namely the NSA and the CIA, for stalling his efforts.

According to Carlson, the agencies spied on him by tapping his messages and emails, and leaked his intentions to the media, which “spooked” Moscow from talking to him. Rogan asked Zuckerberg to explain how this could have happened given encryption safeguards that are supposed to protect messages. “The thing that encryption does that’s really good is it makes it so that the company that’s running the service doesn’t see it. So if you’re using WhatsApp, there’s no point at which the Meta servers see the contents of that message,” Zuckerberg said, noting that even if someone were to hack into Meta’s databases, they could not access users’ private texts. The Signal messaging app, which Carlson used, uses the same encryption, according to Zuckerberg, so the same rules apply. However, he noted that encryption does not stop law enforcement from viewing messages stored on devices.

“What they do is have access to your phone. So it doesn’t matter if anything’s encrypted, they could just see it in plain sight,” he clarified. Zuckerberg mentioned tools such as Pegasus, a spyware developed by the Israeli company NSO Group, which can be covertly installed on mobile phones to access data. According to Zuckerberg, the fact that users’ private messages can be jeopardized by directly breaking into their devices is the reason Meta came up with disappearing messages, where one can have one’s message thread erased after a certain period of time. “If someone has compromised your phone and they can see everything that’s going on there, then obviously they can see stuff as it comes in… So having it be encrypted and disappearing, I think is a pretty good kind of standard of security and privacy,” he stated.

Zuckerberg’s remarks come amid ongoing debates about digital privacy and government surveillance. While end-to-end encryption is lauded for protecting user data, agencies like the CIA and FBI have argued it can impede efforts to combat crime and terrorism. A 2021 FBI training document indicated that US law enforcement can gain limited access to encrypted messages from services like iMessage, Line, and WhatsApp, but not from platforms such as Signal, Telegram, Threema, Viber, WeChat, or Wickr. Additionally, while encrypted messages cannot be intercepted during transmission, reports indicate that backups stored in cloud services may be accessible to law enforcement if an encryption key is attached.

Read more …

Children’s Health Defense. RFK Jr’s organization.

We Were Censored By Meta; We’re Taking Them to the Supreme Court (CHD)

The headline from Politico’s “Playbook” would have been unthinkable eight years ago: “Meta sends Trump a friend request.” After all, Meta’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg, is a political lightning rod in conservative political circles, especially after the $300 million worth of “Zuckerbucks” spent during the 2020 election to elect like-minded politicians. Yet lately, Zuckerberg has been singing a much different tune. He referred to President-elect Trump as “badass,” visited him at Mar-a-Lago, and donated one million dollars to his inaugural fund. This week, Meta made news by adding Dana White, a longtime Trump ally and head of the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), to its board of directors. Then came the real bombshell: Meta ended its so-called “independent fact-checking program,” ostensibly lifting restrictions on speech across Facebook, as well as their other platforms like Instagram and WhatsApp.

In doing so, Zuckerberg admitted the current content moderation practices – in place since criticism of his platform during the 2016 presidential election – have “gone too far” and stressed a commitment to “restoring free expression.” Make no mistake: Meta’s “independent fact-checkers” are neither independent nor fact-based. Their elimination is a positive step and should be encouraged. The announcement came less than 24 hours after the organization I lead – the nonprofit Children’s Health Defense – asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear our censorship lawsuit against Meta. But if Meta is serious about supporting “free expression,” they have a lot of work to do – and it requires more than moving workers from California to Texas, as Zuckerberg also pledged to do.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Meta not only censored our posts – many having to do with topics that the so-called medical “experts” like Dr. Anthony Fauci were dead wrong about – but outright kicked us off the platform without warning. Meta first took action against CHD in May 2019, from takedowns and restrictions to an outright ban in August 2022 that is still in effect. What were our offenses? Simply publishing data on the risks of COVID vaccines, Remdesivir, and ventilation, as well as having the temerity to raise the benefits of natural immunity and alternative treatment with ivermectin and other protocols. An unfettered discussion of all these issues would have saved lives. We knew that many of the government’s promises – on items like the pandemic’s origin and the best way to treat symptoms and prevent its spread – were not grounded in “science” as they claimed but political imperatives from the Biden administration.

In 2020, we took them to court, starting in the San Francisco federal court. We suffered some legal setbacks along the way, and this week ended up before the U.S. Supreme Court. Meta will not change its ways without a fight. They not only kicked us off the platform but censored our supporters and erased our past posts. Meta shut down the “free expression” they claim to be championing. Yes, Meta was coerced by the Biden administration, but there’s more to the story. Zuckerberg’s WhatsApp messages showed that he conspired with the government and chose to censor because he had “bigger fish to fry” than protecting free speech. He knew then that censorship violated the rights of free expression, and he knew then that it wouldn’t help the administration bring COVID under control, but he did it anyway.

The pandemic may be over, but speech about COVID is not. If the Supreme Court takes our case, it can guarantee accountability for Meta’s role in this man-made disaster – and prevent another in the future. Meta, like the other mega-platforms, must be held accountable when they knowingly conform their content-moderation process and decisions or cede active, meaningful control to the government’s preference to suppress constitutionally protected speech. This time it was CHD’s health and medical freedom issues. But who will be next?

Ultimately, this debate is not about any one group or individual but all of us. How many people suffered or lost their lives because they didn’t have access to information that could have helped them make better-informed decisions about their health? The American public is better served with more information rather than less, especially when it is grounded on data-based scientific information. People are smart enough to make up their own minds. Last November, voters sent an unmistakable message that they want a break from the status quo. Kudos to Mark Zuckerberg for recognizing the prevailing winds and saying the right things. But the free speech fight won’t be over until those who were kicked off his platforms are reinstated.

Read more …

“I don’t see Trump as a friend of Russia. I don’t see him being in Putin’s pocket the way a lot of people in the West do. But I see him as willing to make deals..”

US Playing ‘Fool’s Game’ By Ignoring Russia’s Red Lines – Peter Kuznick (RT)

The strategy pursued by the US in the Ukraine conflict risks provoking serious responses from Russia, Peter Kuznick, professor of history and director of the Nuclear Studies Institute at American University, has said. Kuznick earlier appeared on US journalist Tucker Carlson’s podcast show alongside director Oliver Stone. In an exclusive interview to RT on Saturday, he warned against assuming Russia’s red lines can be crossed without consequence. “Russia keeps drawing red lines, and the United States keeps crossing them” on the assumption that Russia is “bluffing” and that President Vladimir Putin “is not going to follow through on his threats,” Kuznick said.

He described this approach as a “fool’s game,” warning it could lead to severe repercussions. Kuznick criticized the belief that Russia will remain passive, calling it “insanity” and stressing that such assumptions gamble with global safety. In December, Putin accused the US of encouraging escalation by arming Kiev and pushing Russia to the “red line.” He claimed the West uses these provocations to instill fear in their populations. Reflecting on Donald Trump’s policies, Kuznick noted Trump “does not view Russia as an implacable enemy,” though his administration provided lethal aid to Ukraine in 2019 and increased sanctions on Russia. “I don’t see Trump as a friend of Russia. I don’t see him being in Putin’s pocket the way a lot of people in the West do. But I see him as willing to make deals,” he said.

“Trump doesn’t have any fixed values or strong beliefs,” which “means that he could either be worse, dramatically worse, or he could be dramatically better,” Kuznick added. He and director Oliver Stone appeared on Tucker Carlson’s show earlier this week in the hopes Trump “would be listening” and “encourage the side of Trump that looks for peaceful solutions.”Kuznick warned that crises in Ukraine, Gaza, Taiwan, or the South China Sea could rapidly escalate into broader conflicts, including nuclear war. Highlighting the growing danger, he said he “would have moved the Doomsday Clock to 60 seconds to midnight.”

In November, Putin approved changes to Russia’s nuclear doctrine that expanded the scenarios that could warrant a nuclear response to include aggression by a non-nuclear state backed by a nuclear power. The doctrine describes nuclear weapons as an “extreme and forced measure” aimed at conflict prevention.Kuznick urged the US to adapt to a multipolar world, emphasizing diplomacy over unilateral action. He also criticized the administration of current President Joe Biden for its aggressive foreign policy and unwavering support for Israel’s actions in Gaza, which he argued undermines Washington’s global standing. “You can’t have it both ways,” Kuznick asserted, highlighting the inconsistency in condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine while supporting Israel’s in Gaza.

Kuznick

Read more …

Sounds more like the voice of reason instead of some extreme right wing party.

AfD Delegates Reject Motion Condemning Putin (RT)

The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has overwhelmingly voted against including in its 2025 election manifesto a condemnation of Russian President Vladimir Putin over the Ukraine conflict. The delegates gathered for a conference in Riesa, Germany on Saturday to decide on the platform for the snap parliamentary elections which will be held next month. Albrecht Glaser, a member of the Bundestag, proposed accusing Russia of failing to protect civilians in Ukraine and stating that the “AfD condemns the behavior of President Putin and once again calls on all warring parties to propose an immediate ceasefire and hold peace talks.” According to news channel N-tv, 69% of the delegates voted to reject the motion.

The draft program approved by the party leadership only briefly mentions the conflict, saying, “the war in Ukraine has disturbed the European peaceful order,” Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported. The draft reportedly says the AfD “sees Ukraine’s future as a neutral state outside of NATO and the EU,” and calls for the restoration of “undisturbed trade” with Russia. Known for its anti-immigration stance, the AfD is the second-most popular party in Germany, according to polls. The party has often been accused of parroting Russian narratives about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The party has rejected the ‘pro-Russian’ label, insisting that continuing military support for Kiev and sanctions on Russian trade and energy exports are counter to German national interests.

During a recent conversation with tech billionaire Elon Musk, AfD co-leader Alice Weidel argued that the EU has abandoned diplomatic efforts in favor of dangerous confrontation with Russia. The conflict could “escalate big time towards a nuclear exchange,” she warned. Early elections were called after Germany’s ruling three-party coalition collapsed in late 2024 due to disagreements over the budget.

Ursula

Former European Commissioner Thierry Breton says the EU has mechanisms to nullify a potential election victory of the AfD:
”We did it in Romania and we will obviously do it in Germany if necessary”

 

 

https://twitter.com/i/status/1878061051993854015

Read more …

The mismanagement is mindblowing.

Why Was Pacific Palisades Reservoir EMPTY? It Gets Worse. (Victoria Taft)

An empty reservoir and dry fire hydrants are now the symbols of California and local officials’ response to the horrific Pacific Palisades wildfire—one of six Santa Ana windblown firestorms still burning in Los Angeles. Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered an investigation to demonstrate that he’s doing something, but the damage is being done right now. The 117 million-gallon Santa Ynez Reservoir was empty and down for maintenance when the devastating fire was sparked, perhaps in the brush, between the homes and the Pacific Coast Highway. You can see a map of the area in my story Good Intentions Might Be the Cause of Devastating Palisades Fire. Friday, officials confirmed that the reservoir had been down for nearly a year —closing in February 2024—for maintenance to the cover of the reservoir.

The New York Times reports that a contractor was hired in November to fix a crack in the cover. It is unclear why the reservoir had to be shut down for that extended period of time. The ripple effect was beyond devastating. The fires broke out Tuesday, Jan. 7. By the next day, Janisse Quiñones, the head of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, said their system tanks went dry three times. You’ll want to remember that because the story is about to get worse. We have three large water tanks, about a million gallons each. We ran out of water in the first tank at about 4:45 p.m. yesterday. We ran out of water in the second tank about 8:30 p.m. and the third tank about 3 a.m. this morning. She never mentioned the empty reservoir, though former DWP Commissioner and mayoral candidate Rick Caruso did say that “the reservoir” hadn’t been filled. He was right and righteously angry.

Firefighters complained that there was no water coming out of the hydrants. The fires burned uncontrollably. In addition to the “investigation” by Newsom, the New York Times reported that the Department of Water and Power, whose job it is to fill the reservoirs, is looking into whether the empty Santa Ynez reservoir in Pacific Palisades made a difference in their fire response. We are not kidding. [..] Water for the Pacific Palisades is fed by a 36-inch line that flows by gravity from the larger Stone Canyon Reservoir, said Marty Adams, a former general manager and chief engineer at the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. That water line also fills the Santa Ynez Reservoir. Water from the two reservoirs then sustain the water system for the Pacific Palisades, and also pump systems that fill storage tanks that feed higher-elevation homes in the neighborhood.

It was unclear whether officials could have brought the reservoir back online before the fire, after forecasters began warning of dangerous wildfire conditions. Now, I’m no hydrologist or physicist, but wouldn’t water pressure be helped by having water in all the tanks and reservoirs? Am I missing something here? But, what ho! We get an answer. Mr. Adams said an operational reservoir would have been helpful initially to more fully feed the water system in the area. But he also said it appeared that that reservoir and the tanks would have eventually been drained in a fire that was consuming so many homes at once. Municipal water systems are generally designed to sustain water loads for much smaller fires than what consumed Pacific Palisades. [emphasis added]

Those are a lot of words to say that more water would have been helpful. Speaking of not being a hydrologist, I looked up the latest state hydrology report because the global warming crowd desperately hopes to blame “climate change/catastrophe” for the fires. Yeah, well, that dog won’t hunt. If you’re new here, from east to west Southern California, there’s desert, then mountains, then semi-arid land all the way to the ocean. While the media will tell you this is climate change, this is no change at all. This is the state of play in California all the time. However, California has received a surge in water in the last few years following a drought, but there have been no new reservoirs built to store water since the last one opened in 1979. According the latest hydrologist report, “Major flood control reservoirs are either near their respective top of conservation levels or below.”

Precipitation has been slow in the first couple of weeks of the year, but the “The statewide accumulated precipitation to end of November 2024 was 5.22 inches, which is 132% of average.” The snowpack, which is also where water is stored, and Gavin Newsom lets flow out to the Pacific Ocean to “save” a bait fish, is growing. “The statewide average snow water equivalent (SWE) was 5.1 inches for December 1, which is 168% percent of normal and 19% of April 1 average.” In other words, there’s been precipitation — remember all those atmospheric rivers? — and if there were more storage there would be more water available for drinking and fighting fires. I could go into the environmental rules that don’t allow much, if any, thinning in forests, road building, otherwise known as fire breaks, reservoir building, and preventative burning, which used to happen all the time to stop these conflagrations that the enviros like to blame on climate, but I do in my other stories.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Pope
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877908221987291462

Stone

Train
https://twitter.com/i/status/1877829927334236235

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Jul 082024
 


Jacques-Louis David Erasistratus Discovering the Cause of Antiochus’ Disease 1774

 

Democratic Party ‘Clans Clash’ in Wake of Biden’s Debate Performance (Sp.)
Get a Dog: The Political and Media Establishment Turns on Biden (Turley)
‘Blitz Primary’ Proposed as Democratic Insiders Dissatisfied With Biden (Sp.)
Biden Campaign Fed Questions For ‘I’m A Black Woman’ Interview (RT)
Biden Refuses To Believe Poll Numbers (RT)
President Biden Must Resign, or Be Impeached (Young)
Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election (ZH)
New French Governing Coalition Will Likely Be ‘Fragile’ (Sp.)
How ‘Putin Endorsed Le Pen’: Russiagate Comes To France (Amar)
A Nation In Pain: How Political Idealism Destroyed Ukraine (Glenn Diesen)
Orban’s Peace Mission Continues (Sp.)
Xi Jinping Welcomes Viktor Orban To Beijing (RT)
Israel Deliberately Killed Own Citizens on October 7 – Report (Sp.)
BRICS To Launch Independent Financial System – Moscow (RT)
Elon Musk Issues WhatsApp Safety Warning (RT)

 

 

 

 

Tuberville
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809957317779087373

 

 

Biden chip
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809601970140815397

 

 

Megyn

 

 

Obamagate

 

 

Pope

 

 

Biden ABC full interview

 

 

 

 

“..a lot of people don’t understand is that Barack Obama and the Clintons and Biden don’t have a great relationship..”

Democratic Party ‘Clans Clash’ in Wake of Biden’s Debate Performance (Sp.)

A Wall Street Journal poll conducted in the wake of Joe Biden’s debate against Trump – his first of the 2024 election cycle – showed that 80 percent of the nation’s voters think the Democrat is too old to run for a second term. Fissures are growing within the Democratic Party’s three leading clans as Joe Biden refuses to give in to demands to drop out of the 2024 race, the Financial Times has reported. An “already-fractured” Democratic Party is reportedly trying desperately to carry out damage control in the wake of the 81-year-old president’s debate against Trump. But the “historic crisis” that has led to increasing questions regarding his mental acuity has opened up “old wounds and rivalries,” noted the FT. The Democratic Party is described as witnessing a raging battle between “three leading clans,” while the Republican Party “has appeared ever more uniform” under Trump.

Some Democrats are ostensibly hoping Biden’s once boss, ex-president Barack Obama, could “usher Biden aside.” However, the outlet cites those from the inner Biden circle as warning that such a step would be “counterproductive.” The reason is that there is supposedly a lingering bitterness among the Bidens after Obama backed Hillary Clinton, and not vice-president Biden to be his successor in 2015. Clinton went on to lose that presidential bid to Trump in 2016. “I think the thing that a lot of people don’t understand is that Barack Obama and the Clintons and Biden don’t have a great relationship,” one Democratic lobbyist was cited as saying. As for Obama himself, during his debut stint as senator representing Illinois from 2005 to 2008 he inflamed the Clintons after he “had the audacity” to challenge Hillary Clinton for the party’s 2008 nomination, reminded the outlet. “There is no unity among Democrats because, basically, the Democratic coalition’s pieces do not share the same values,” party strategist Hank Sheinkopf was cited as saying.

The various degrees of resentment nursed overtly by the Bidens, Obamas and the Clintons come amid a flurry of Democratic politicians, donors, and other supporters calling for the removal of Biden as candidate. Biden – appearing to be confused and incoherent throughout his debate with the Republican frontrunner last Thursday – reinforced ongoing concerns about his cognitive abilities. The president has taken a defiant stance, claiming his debate performance was just a “bad episode.” But 80 percent of the nation’s voters insist that the Democrat is too old to run for a second term, according to a Wall Street Journal poll released on Wednesday. Amid a flurry of reports attempting to suggest possible replacements for Biden, a new campaign has been imploring him to “Pass the Torch.” Hours before Biden was interviewed by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, where he insisted that he will stay in the race, Democratic activists launched a grassroots campaign begging the president to step aside.

They urged him to act on a 2020 pledge to be a “transition” president. “Democrats need the strongest possible ticket to maximize our chances of winning in November. It has become very clear, based on both long-term polling and the recent debate, that Democrats’ current ticket is not the strongest one we can put forward,” said the campaign.

Read more …

“In a blink, he has gone from “the best Biden ever” to a type of “comatose but comfortable” defense. It is the political version of going from blue chip to junk bond status in a week.”

Get a Dog: The Political and Media Establishment Turns on Biden (Turley)

Fox host Shannon Bream reported this morning that her staff tried for an entire week to get a single Democrat to go on the show to defend President Joe Biden as the party’s nominee. Not a single Democrat was willing to do so. In the meantime, the New York Times is reporting that a senior White House official is calling for Biden to step down as the nominee due to his declining physical and mental condition. The media, which has long attacked those questioning Biden’s fitness, is now on board with the Democratic establishment in pushing the President to withdraw. The one constant in this ever-changing city is that self-interest alone drives policies and alliances. If you endanger the meal ticket of members of Congress, you are immediately persona non grata. Biden is now threatening Democratic control of both the White House and the Congress. The word is out that Biden has to go so the media is suddenly noticing what it long refused to see.

That goes for staffers too. For years, the staff has engaged in a dishonest effort to shield Biden from questions and to carefully script and choreograph his appearances. Figures like Karine Jean-Pierre and close political allies knowingly misled the public as to the President’s deteriorating condition. Even after telling the public to watch the President in interviews, it was revealed this weekend that the White House was feeding pre-written questions to favorable hosts. Indeed, the media is actually blaming conservatives for failing to reveal the President’s condition due to their effort to frame the news. The truth is now unavoidable. The President has continued to struggle with clarity, as when he recently declared “by the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman… to serve with a black president.”

In the case of this high-level White House staffer, he or she also said nothing for months, even as the White House attacked Fox News and other outlets for showing the President’s confusion at public events. They were denounced as “cheap fakes.” This staffer reportedly worked with Biden during his presidency, vice presidency and 2020 campaign. As with the media, however, the staffer now seems to have the green light to kick the President to the curb to strengthen Democratic chances in the upcoming election. The staffer revealed that Biden has repeatedly become confused and weakened in the course of the day. Somehow this is being portrayed as courageous despite the fact that the staffer remained silent as others were attacked for raising these issues and the White House actively hid the President’s declining condition.

As is often the case, everyone in Washington is jumping ship as the rats run for the poop deck. No one will be held responsible for months and months of misleading the public about the condition of the man who holds the nuclear launch codes. Just weeks ago, the media was heralding the brilliance and sharpness of the President. On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough stated “start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And F— you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I have known him for years…If it weren’t the truth I wouldn’t say it.” Now, the best that Biden can muster is MSNBC’s Joy Reid who declared “If it’s Biden in a coma, I’m going to vote for Biden in a coma. I don’t even really, in particular, like the guy. A lot of his policies? Don’t like them, [but] he’s not Donald Trump, right?”

Now there’s a roaring endorsement. The comatose POTUS pitch. Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) threw in his own damning defense by saying that the public should just look at the people around the President, a type of figurehead rationale for keeping a possibly infirm president. As usual, it is the public that has been played as chumps by the establishment and the media. The public is expected to forget the years of shielding Biden and the many public testimonials of his wickedly sharp acumen. In a blink, he has gone from “the best Biden ever” to a type of “comatose but comfortable” defense. It is the political version of going from blue chip to junk bond status in a week.

Read more …

“..moderated by celebrities like Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Smith and Michelle Obama..”

“Democratic Party luminaries are likely to continue to stick with Biden, maintaining their influence within the organization even if it means defeat in November.”

‘Blitz Primary’ Proposed as Democratic Insiders Dissatisfied With Biden (Sp.)

Two Democratic insiders have proposed a novel idea to address the “malaise and crisis” within the party amid questions over US President Joe Biden’s age and mental acuity. Ted Dintersmith, a wealthy party donor, and Rosa Brooks, a law professor and veteran of former President Barack Obama’s Defense Department, have proposed a whirlwind “blitz primary” to rapidly choose a replacement for the elderly party leader. The plan suggests Democratic Party leaders could choose six candidates, who would run brief “positive-only” campaigns putting forward their case for why they should be the party’s nominee. Weekly events would be held where the candidates put forward their ideas and vision, moderated by celebrities like Oprah Winfrey, Taylor Smith and Michelle Obama in order to stir voter interest. After one month’s time the party leaders would vote to select a ticket from the group of contenders, making the decision before the start of the Democratic National Convention on August 19.

The insiders claim the ploy would reinvigorate interest in the party and revive its electoral chances, which suffered a steep decline after Biden’s widely-panned performance at June 27th’s televised debate. “We can limp to shameful, avoidable democracy-ending defeat,” Brooks and Dintersmith reason, “or Democrats can make this Our Finest Hour. While we hope for help from Lord Almighty, the Lord helps those who help themselves. We need to act. Now.” Observers suggest the idea is unlikely to gain traction as it would require the blessing of Biden, who has insisted he will continue his candidacy unless instructed otherwise by God himself. It would also require Kamala Harris to surrender her assumed right to top the ticket as the current Vice President. The appearance of the party passing over a Black and female presumptive nominee could cause lasting controversy among core Democratic Party constituencies, critics say.

What the plan has going for it, in the likely view of Democratic Party figures, is that it avoids the pesky issue of having to put the question to actual voters. Democratic Party delegates – the typically well-connected insiders chosen after state primaries or granted influence by virtue of their status in the party – would both choose the list of candidates and make the final decision once they are heard. Leaked emails published by Wikileaks after 2016’s contentious party primary revealed insiders intervened heavily to tilt the process in favor of former candidate Hillary Clinton and against Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. In 2020, when Sanders again appeared to be in a strong position to win the party’s nomination, former President Barack Obama reportedly intervened behind the scenes to encourage multiple candidates to drop out and throw their support behind Biden instead.

The sudden surge of publicity for Biden, and stern warnings over the consequences of choosing Sanders, convinced voters to turn towards the former Obama vice president after Sanders’ victories in the first three state primaries had made his victory appear inevitable. The heavy hand of insiders in the candidate selection process – and series of highly questionable excuses offered to supporters for Biden’s disastrous debate performance – suggest the Democratic Party hardly lives up to its name. If some DNC figures remain concerned over the electoral chances of Joe Biden, they are terrified of losing control of the party to its voters, who may choose to back a forbidden candidate. All of which suggests Democratic Party luminaries are likely to continue to stick with Biden, maintaining their influence within the organization even if it means defeat in November.

Read more …

“The US president’s team has claimed “it is not at all uncommon” for guests to share topics they would prefer to discuss with journalists..”

Biden Campaign Fed Questions For ‘I’m A Black Woman’ Interview (RT)

The first journalists to interview US president Joe Biden after his disastrous performance in the June 27 debate against Donald Trump have said that they were given lists of approved questions by his campaign staff. Biden made appearances on radio shows with largely black audiences in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania on Thursday, a week after his face-off with Trump, in which the 81-year-old president appeared frail and lost his train of thought on multiple occasions. The interviews were used to show Biden’s doubters, especially in his own Democratic Party, that he is mentally and physically able for a reelection campaign and capable of discussing his record and answering questions coherently. However, the radio appearances were marred with more gaffes, with the president, among other things, describing himself as a “black woman.” “By the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice president, first black woman… to serve with a black president. Proud to be involved of the first black woman on the Supreme Court.

There’s so much that we can do because… look, we’re the United States of America,” Biden said on The Earl Ingram Show on Wisconsin’s CivicMedia. Host Earl told AP on Saturday that the Biden campaign gave him five “exact questions to ask” ahead of the interview. “There was no back and forth,” he added. “I probably would never have accepted, it but this was an opportunity to talk to the president of the United States,” Ingram explained. A few hours earlier, Andrea Lawful-Sanders, the host of The Source, a program on WURD in Pennsylvania, told CNN that “the questions were sent to me for approval; I approved of them” ahead of the interview with Biden. The Biden campaign’s spokeswoman, Lauren Hitt, confirmed the radio hosts’ claims, saying in a statement that “it is not at all an uncommon practice for interviewees to share topics they would prefer. These questions were relevant to news of the day.”

“We do not condition interviews on acceptance of these questions, and hosts are always free to ask the questions they think will best inform their listeners,” Hitt stressed. A source within Biden’s team told CBS News that it “will refrain from offering suggested questions” to journalists in his future interviews. A poll by Reuters/Ipsos revealed that one in three Democrats believes that Biden should quit the race after his debate performance, while some key donors have reportedly demanded that the president be replaced on the party’s ticket. In his interview with ABC News on Friday, Biden rejected the possibility of stepping down, insisting that he was “the most qualified person” to defeat Trump.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1809619673748529338

Read more …

Everybody loves me!

Biden Refuses To Believe Poll Numbers (RT)

US President Joe Biden said he does not accept polling data showing a slump in support, speaking in a televised interview on Friday. During the sit-down, ABC host George Stephanopoulos said: Mr. President, I’ve never seen a president with 36% approval get reelected.” Biden replied: “Well, I don’t believe that’s my approval rating. That’s not what our polls show,” without specifying which polling data he was relying on. A New York Times/Siena College poll released on Monday found that 36% of likely voters approve of the way Biden is handling his job as president. On voter intentions, the same survey showed Trump leading Biden with 49% to 43%, widening the gap from a 3-point lead before the debate.

“Look, you know polling better than anybody. Do you think polling data is as accurate as it used to be?” the US leader parried when Stephanopoulos insisted that Biden was close but still behind Trump even before going into the debate. Biden insisted that there’s nobody “more qualified to be president or win this race than me” and said he would not drop out, even if top Democratic leaders asked him to, claiming that only “the Lord Almighty” could convince him to step aside. Biden is struggling to dispel concerns over whether he is mentally and physically capable of leading the country for another four years following his halting performance in a televised debate against Republican rival Donald Trump.

The oldest US president in history appeared so frail and confused throughout the encounter last week that a survey conducted by CBS News/YouGov shortly afterwards found that 72% of registered voters do not believe Biden has the “mental and cognitive health necessary to serve as president.” A Suffolk University/USA TODAY poll published on Tuesday found Trump beating Biden by 3 percentage points, while a survey conducted for CNN by SSRS put Trump 6 points in the lead. A separate Bloomberg News/Morning Consult tracking poll showed Biden narrowing the gap over the past week and now losing “by only 2 percentage points” in the critical swing states needed to win the November election. Overall, less than one in five respondents in those states thought the 81-year-old was the “more coherent, mentally fit or dominant participant” of the debate.

Read more …

“A president’s failure to use due care or be loyal is ground for impeachment..”

President Biden Must Resign, or Be Impeached (Young)

President Biden’s duty to the American people is to “faithfully execute” his office. As a public trustee, Biden took an oath to do what is right. He is a trustee of powers bestowed upon him by the Constitution in return for his promise to be dutiful. Like every agent and trustee, Biden owes fiduciary duties to those who are served by his decisions. He owes them two duties: the duty of always acting with due care; and the duty of giving them his absolute loyalty, always putting their interests above his own. A president’s failure to use due care or be loyal is ground for impeachment. Under our Constitution, impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors” is not a criminal proceeding. Rather, it is a civil proceeding to discharge from office one who has failed in his or her trusteeship.

John Locke put it this way: “Who shall be judge, whether the prince or legislative act contrary to their trust? … To this I reply, The people shall be judge; for who shall be judge whether his trustee or deputy acts well, and according to the trust reposed in him, but he who deputes him, and must, by having deputed him, have still a power to discard him, when he fails in his trust? If this be reasonable in particular cases of private men, why should it be otherwise in that of the greatest moment, where the welfare of millions is concerned, and also where the evil, if not prevented, is greater, and the redress very difficult, dear, and dangerous?”

More than 50 years ago, when the impeachment of Richard Nixon was under consideration in the House of Representatives, I researched the English parliamentary practice of impeaching high officers for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The lead special counsel in the impeachment proceeding, John Doar, incorporated my conclusions into the articles of impeachment of Richard Nixon in these words: In all of this, Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore Richard M. Nixon, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.

The same standard of abuse of fiduciary duties was later included in the articles of impeachment of Donald Trump: “In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States.” As we saw last Thursday, President Biden is no longer capable of acting with due care as steward of the best interest of the American people. He appeared physically and cognitively inept. His answers to simple questions were nonsensical. Even Nancy Pelosi wondered aloud, “Is this an episode or is this a condition?”

For Biden to remain in office, he will not be faithfully executing it. Rather, he will be using the powers of the office for self-serving ends, depriving the American people of a vigorous defender of our rights and privileges. If Biden does not resign immediately, he has committed an impeachable offense by causing “manifest injury of the people of the United States.” Should Biden attempt to have his cake and eat it too, he might withdraw his candidacy for this year’s presidential election but not resign as president. If he affirms that he would not be qualified to execute the office of president in January 2025, then why is he qualified to serve in that office today? To withdraw from the presidential race but continue in office would be a violation of his duty of loyalty to the American people. Joe Biden made a choice when he took the oath of office to serve as our president. If he can no longer be loyal or serve with due care, then he must resign his office or be impeached.

Read more …

Very few saw that coming..

Leftist Coalition Set For Shock Victory In French Election (ZH)

Well, no one saw that coming… The last-minute-arranged broad left-wing coalition known as The New Popular Front (NFP), was leading a tight French legislative election Sunday, ahead of both President Emmanuel Macron’s centrists and Le Pen’s rightists, projections showed. Provisional estimates from four pollsters suggest the following seat projections: • Left Alliance Set for 170-215 Seats • Macron’s Group Set for 150-182 Seats • Le Pen’s Group Set for 110-158 Seats. It looks like the anti-National Rally front worked better than anyone expected, catching the polling companies by surprise. The projected results suggest that the co-ordinated anti-RN strategy, under which the left and center tactically withdrew their candidates from run-offs, had paid off. If confirmed in final voting tallies, the projections suggest that none of the three main blocs will be able easily to command a governing majority, potentially leaving France in a period of political gridlock.

There are some big barriers to that given that Macron himself has called France Unbowed – a big part of the left’s New Popular Front – an extremist party and some of his supports have called against voting for its candidates. AP reports that the French leftist leader,Jean-Luc Melenchon says elections are an “immense relief for a majority of people,” demands prime minister resign. Melenchon says the New Popular Front government would apply its program and nothing but the program as he refuses any negotiation with Macron’s party or any combination. As Bloomberg reports, that theoretically would mean some disruptive changes of economic policy, and by decree according to Melenchon: • Undoing the pension reform; • raising the minimum wage; • a 90% top marginal tax rate; • and freezing prices of some consumer staples. Not a pretty picture for French bonds either way.

Andrea Tueni, head of sales trading at Saxo Banque France: “This is a big surprise, it’s a real blow for the RN. That being said, it’s not necessarily good for markets: The Nouveau Front Populaire taking the lead could generate concerns due to their program which was the most poorly perceived by the markets.” French National Rally Leader Jordan Bardella warns this vote “has thrown France into the arms of the far-Left.” As @RUNews posted on X: “Macron now faces a total mess. He aimed to stop ‘Hitler’ party and mobilized Lenin (Mélenchon), but now he has both Lenin and Hitler, leaving him stuck in the middle.” Presumably all the globalist fear mongering over the so-called ‘Hitler-ite’ Le Pen pushed the French people back into the immigrant-loving arms of the Left? Or something else went down?

Read more …

If there is a coalition at all..

New French Governing Coalition Will Likely Be ‘Fragile’ (Sp.)

Assessing the results of the second round of the snap parliamentary elections in France, it can be assumed that the outcome will create a serious governance problem in the country. The future governing coalition will likely be fragile and society will be characterized by greater political polarization, chairman of Rome-based think tank Vision and Global Trends Tiberio Graziani told Sputnik. “Economic problems will worsen. It will be three years of political crisis,” he said. France is already going through a political crisis, both internally and within Europe. The elections show that the country is facing political, economic and social crises.

The same can be said about other European nations, like Germany, the expert added. Jean-Luc Melanchon’s left-wing New Popular Front coalition won the parliamentary elections, securing 182 seats (out of 577) in the French parliament. President Emmanuel Macron’s bloc gained 168 seats. Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardelle’s National Rally got 143 parliamentary seats.

Read more …

And then she loses…

How ‘Putin Endorsed Le Pen’: Russiagate Comes To France (Amar)

It is perfectly predictable and yet a sorry spectacle every time it happens: the great big bad Russia panic whenever, and that’s frequently nowadays, Western liberals and Centrists are losing their grip. This time it’s the turn of France. With the far-right/right-populist National Rally (RN) under Marine Le Pen and Jordan Bardella succeeding at the polls as never before, French and other Western mainstream media are serving up the same stale old dish of fearmongering and, most importantly, blame shifting.Russiagate, or really Russia Rage (as in Road Rage), and its many copies, have been with us since Hillary Clinton and her cult were incapable of facing the fact that she lost the 2016 US presidential election because she is a dreadful person with no redeeming graces – and unlike her naturally gifted if shifty and immoral husband, a catastrophically incompetent politician.

And like every good form of insanity, Russia Rage is absolutely immune to both falsification and its own record of failure, even as a piece of demagoguery. We know that the only real scandal about “Russiagate” was that it was a hoax, the result of massive exaggeration, outright lying, and all-round manipulation by Democratic party operatives and their media allies. We also know that it did not even work on its own dishonest terms. Russia Rage was, in American journalist Matt Taibbi’s words, an “epic disaster.” Indeed, if it had any political effect, then to ultimately help – not damage – its target, Donald Trump: Almost a decade after the inception of the “Russiagate” hoax, Trump is back, stronger than ever and set to capture the American presidency again. And this time, his organization and plans are much more elaborate and ambitious, and, just now, obliging conservative judges at the Supreme Court have also equipped him with almost perfect legal immunity.

The other thing that Russia Rage did accomplish is, of course, to massively damage the credibility of US mainstream media. Not that they ever deserved any (ask the Iraqis, for instance, owners of non-existent WMDs and victims of an absolutely illegal and devastating war of aggression based on a big fat lie eagerly supported by those media). But Russia Rage brought the lying home in a way that woke up many Americans. By 2022, US media credibility was the lowest “among 46 nations, according to a study by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.” One year before, “83 percent of Americans saw ‘fake news’ as a ‘problem,’ and 56 percent – mostly Republicans and independents – agreed that the media were “truly the enemy of the American people.”

And yet, here we go again. In best Russia Rage style, the Washington Post, relying unquestioningly on French intelligence services and, of course, anonymous “sources,” is mapping out a whole “ecosystem” of Russian influence campaigns targeting, it maintains, the French election as well as the Olympics. And not only now but for about a year already. One wonders how those wicked Russians foresaw Macron’s bizarre decision to cap his EU Parliament election failure with a snap legislative election at home to make the fiasco complete. Or, perhaps, must we now assume that Macron is working for Russia as well? Who knows? The French paper of record Le Monde has been keeping up a steady, ominous drumbeat for months already, keeping its readers on edge with tales of Russian subversion and, always, of course, the National Rally as its tool. Perish the thought that this could have anything to do with the RN being the most popular and most dangerous challenger to the Macronist regime of extreme Centrism.

Read more …

” Idealists who seek to transcend power politics and create a more benign world thus find themselves intensifying the security competition and instigating wars.”

A Nation In Pain: How Political Idealism Destroyed Ukraine (Glenn Diesen)

Political realism is commonly and mistakenly portrayed as immoral because its principal focus is on an inescapable security competition, and it thus rejects idealist efforts to transcend power politics. Because states canot break away from security competition, morality for the realist entails acting in accordance with the balance of power logic as the foundation for stability and peace. Idealist efforts to break with power politics can then be defined as immoral, as they undermine the management of the security competition as the foundation of peace. As Raymond Aron expressed in 1966: “The idealist, believing he has broken with power politics exaggerates its crimes.”The most appealing and dangerous idealist argument that destroyed Ukraine is that it has the right to join any military alliance it desires.

It is a very attractive statement that can easily win support from the public, as it affirms the freedom and sovereignty of Ukraine, and the alternative is seemingly that Russia should be allowed to dictate Ukraine’s policies. However, arguing that Ukraine should be allowed to join any military alliance is an idealist argument, as it appeals to how we would like the world to be, not how the world actually works. The principle that peace is derived from the expansion of military alliances without taking into account the security interests of other great powers has never existed. States such as Ukraine that border a great power have every reason to express legitimate security concerns, but inviting a rival great power such as the US into its territory intensifies the security competition. Is it moral to insist on how the world ought to be when war is the consequence of ignoring how the world actually works? The alternative to expanding NATO is not to accept a Russian sphere of influence, which denotes a zone of exclusive influence.

Peace is derived from recognizing a Russian sphere of interests, which is an area where Russian security interests must be recognized and incorporated rather than excluded. It did not use to be controversial to argue that Russian security interests must be taken into account when operating on its borders. This is why Europe had a belt of neutral states as a buffer between East and West during the Cold War to mitigate the security competition. Mexico has plenty of freedoms in the international system, but it does not have the freedom to join a Chinese-led military alliance or to host Chinese military bases. The idealist argument that Mexico can do as it pleases implies ignoring US security concerns, and the result would likely be the US destruction of Mexico. If Scotland secedes from the UK and then joins a Russian-led military alliance and hosts Russian missiles, would the English still champion the principle of consent?

When we live in a realist world and recognize that security competition must be mitigated for peace, then we accept a security system based on mutual constraints. When we live in the idealist world of good states versus evil states, then the force for good should not be constrained. Peace is then ensured when good defeats evil, and compromise is mere appeasement. Idealists who seek to transcend power politics and create a more benign world thus find themselves intensifying the security competition and instigating wars.

Read more …

“Hungarian FM Warns EU Politicians Will Have to ‘Buckle Up”

Orban’s Peace Mission Continues (Sp.)

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto on Sunday suggested that European politicians “buckle up” ahead of Hungary’s further actions aimed at promoting peace. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban visited Russia on Friday to hold talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Orban described his visit as a continuation of his “peace mission” after a visit to Kiev, which took place on Tuesday. He has also announced more surprising meetings next week. Orban’s activity, however, sparked criticism from the EU authorities. “We are not deterred or discouraged by these attacks [by the EU officials]. The peace mission continues and even intensifies, so I suggest that European pro-war politicians buckle up and follow closely next week as well,” Szijjarto said in a video address on his social media.

The criticism Hungary faced during this week showed that the crisis in the European Union is being fueled by politicians who are supplying Ukraine with weapons, mulling sending troops there, and talking about nuclear weapons, he added. Hungary’s six-month presidency of the EU Council, which started on July 1, will be dedicated to the country’s peace mission, the top Hungarian diplomat said. Budapest will do everything it can to put an end to the Ukrainian conflict and to get Europe out of its “suffocating military crisis,” he added.

Read more …

Orban behaves like a true EU leader.

Xi Jinping Welcomes Viktor Orban To Beijing (RT)

Chinese President Xi Jinping has held a meeting with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who is in Beijing on what he has dubbed a “peacekeeping mission,” Xinhua reported on Monday morning. “China is a key power in creating the conditions for peace in the Russia-Ukraine war. This is why I came to meet with President Xi in Beijing, just two months after his official visit to Budapest,” Orban wrote in a post on X (formerly Twitter). Details of the meeting have yet to be revealed, but it follows Orban’s trips to Kiev and Moscow last week. The Hungarian prime minister called the Beijing trip a “peace mission 3.0” upon his arrival.

Orban embarked on an unannounced trip to Kiev last Tuesday, where he proposed a “quick ceasefire” to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky. Orban then traveled to Moscow to discuss the “shortest way out” of the conflict with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Moscow’s and Kiev’s positions remain very “far apart,” according to the Hungarian leader, who noted that Zelensky “didn’t like” his proposals. Meanwhile, Putin reiterated Moscow’s readiness to resolve the hostilities through negotiations, but said the Ukrainian leadership appears committed to waging war “until the end.” Orban’s meeting with Putin angered some fellow EU leaders, while Kiev expressed fury that the Hungarian leader had traveled to Russia “without approval or coordination with Ukraine.”

Read more …

Hannibal.

Israel Deliberately Killed Own Citizens on October 7 – Report (Sp.)

A report in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz has claimed the IDF invoked the controversial Hannibal directive during Hamas’ October 7 attack last year, deliberately killing Israelis to prevent them from being taken hostage by Palestinian fighters. “Documents and testimonies obtained by Haaretz reveal the Hannibal operational order, which directs the use of force to prevent soldiers being taken into captivity, was employed at three army facilities infiltrated by Hamas, potentially endangering civilians as well,” read an article in the liberal paper’s Sunday edition. “‘Not a single vehicle can return to Gaza’ was the order,” writes journalist Yaniv Kubovich. “At this point, the IDF was not aware of the extent of kidnapping along the Gaza border, but it did know that many people were involved. Thus, it was entirely clear what that message meant, and what the fate of some of the kidnapped people would be.”

The newspaper notes the exact number of Israelis killed by IDF fire is unknown. The report cites testimony from servicemembers up and down the IDF chain of command, including soldiers and mid- and senior-level officers. Highly controversial within and outside of Israel, the so-called Hannibal directive was devised in response to the threat of armed groups gaining leverage over the Israeli state through the taking of hostages. Palestinian forces took several Israelis captive during the 1970s and 80s, successfully negotiating the release of Palestinian prisoners in return. The notion Israelis were “better dead than abducted” led to the creation of the protocol, which allowed the use of deadly force. Claims of the invocation of the Hannibal directive on October 7 were made months ago when it was revealed an IDF brigadier general instructed a tank to shell a house in Kibbutz Be’eri with a number of Israelis and Hamas fighters inside, killing 13 Israeli captives.

But Sunday’s report is the most complete accounting to date of accusations of friendly fire. The allegations add to claims Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has deliberately placed Israeli citizens in harm’s way in order to pursue the Likud party’s vision of territorial maximalism. The response to Hamas’ October 7 attack was reportedly delayed for hours because Netanyahu had redeployed soldiers to support Jewish settlers in the occupied West Bank. Netanyahu’s government received urgent warnings from Egyptian authorities in the months leading up to Hamas’ attack that the Palestinian group was likely planning a significant armed operation, it has been revealed. Israeli reconnaissance of the Gaza Strip, broadly considered “one of the most heavily surveilled places in the world,” showed Palestinian fighters were training in the use of hang gliders that were used to breach the enclave’s border fence.

Read more …

And perhaps a currency.

BRICS To Launch Independent Financial System – Moscow (RT)

Countries of the BRICS economic bloc are currently working on the launch of a financial system that would be independent of the dominance of third parties, according to the Russian Ambassador to China Igor Morgulov. The volume of Russia’s transactions in national currencies with fellow BRICS nations is constantly growing, the envoy said on Saturday in Beijing, speaking at the 12th World Peace Forum (WPF). Morgulov highlighted that Russia-China trade turnover had reached $240 billion and that 92% of settlements were being conducted in rubles and yuans. “We are leaving the dollar-dominated space and developing the mechanism and tools for a truly independent financial system,” the ambassador said, as cited by RIA Novosti.

Morgulov also said that introducing a new single currency is still some way off but stressed that the group – which recently expanded and now comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Ethiopia, Iran and Egypt – is “moving in this direction.” Last month, Russia’s Deputy Finance Minister Ivan Chebeskov told media that Russia was working on creating a settlement-and-payment infrastructure together with BRICS member states’ central banks. The senior state official specified that the economic bloc was working on launching the BRICS Bridge platform for settlements in national currencies. In addition, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told Russian daily Vedomosti that BRICS Bridge could provide member states an opportunity to make settlements using digital assets of central banks linked to national currencies

Russia has been promoting its own domestic payment system as a reliable alternative to SWIFT, after many of the country’s financial institutions were cut off from the Western financial network in 2022. The Russian SPFS interbank messaging system ensures the secure transfer of financial messages between banks both inside and outside the country. Moscow has also accelerated efforts to move away from SWIFT by trading with international partners using their respective national currencies. The trend has been increasingly supported by members of the BRICS group, which have shifted from using the dollar and euro for trade settlements. The share of national currencies in Russia’s settlements with BRICS countries jumped to 85% at the end of 2023, up from 26% two years ago.

Read more …

“WhatsApp exports your user data every night. Some people still think it is secure..”

Elon Musk Issues WhatsApp Safety Warning (RT)

Elon Musk, owner of X (formerly Twitter), has again attacked WhatsApp over its handling of personal data. On Saturday, Musk commented on a post on X; one of the users had asked: “If WhatsApp messages are end-to-end encrypted, why do we see ads related to the things we discussed in our chats?” The entrepreneur offered a short answer to the question, saying: “WhatsApp is not secure at all.” Musk had already engaged in an online spat with WhatsApp, which is owned by Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta conglomerate, this May. At the time, he responded to another post on X, which claimed that “WhatsApp exports user data nightly, which is analyzed and used for targeted advertising, making users the product, not the customer.” “WhatsApp exports your user data every night. Some people still think it is secure,” the Tesla and SpaceX CEO said, referring to longstanding concerns about data sharing between WhatsApp and Meta’s other platform, Facebook.

The exchange was noticed by WhatsApp’s head, Will Cathcart, who tried to defend his platform’s conduct. “Many have said this already, but worth repeating: this is not correct. We take security seriously and that’s why we end-to-end encrypt your messages. They don’t get sent to us every night or exported to us,” Cathcart said in his post on X. However, security researcher Tommy Mysk, who also joined the debate, clarified that while messages on WhatsApp might be end-to-end encrypted, “user data is not only about messages.” “The metadata such as user location, which contacts the user is communicating with, the patterns of when the user is online, etc. This metadata according to your privacy policy is indeed used for targeted ads across Meta services,” he said. “So, Elon Musk is right,” Mysk, who had previously uncovered data vulnerabilities in TikTok, Facebook and Apple’s products, wrote.

In 2022, when he was still in the process of purchasing Twitter, Musk argued that Zuckerberg had too much control over social media due to Meta owning Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. He called Meta’s CEO “Mark Zuckerberg XIV” in reference to France’s “Sun King” Louis XIV, who apocryphally claimed to be the state itself and was known for his wealth and authoritarian power. In 2023, the two tech billionaires were on the verge of holding a cage match against each other, but the bout never happened. Relations between Musk and Zuckerberg deteriorated even further after Meta launched Threads last summer, with the platform, which offers a space for real-time online conversations, being seen as a direct competitor to Twitter. Threads garnered 100 million users in the first days after launch, but the public’s interest in the app quickly subsided.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Woody
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809852748805902363

 

 

Guns

 

 

Rescue
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809326362399740310

 

 

Koala
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809886253971656800

 

 


Dick Van Duijn captured the exact moment a squirrel stopped to smell a flower

 

 

Dog angry
https://twitter.com/i/status/1810030529464476003

 

 

The best
https://twitter.com/i/status/1809886483957834082

 

 

Alpaca

 

 

 

 

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