Sep 302025
 


Édouard Boubat Café La Tartine, Paris 1989

 

Trump’s Plan For Gaza Could Affect Ukrainian Conflict — Witkoff (TASS)
Trump Unveils 20-Point Gaza Cease-Fire Plan (NYP)
‘Putin Doesn’t Want World War III’ – Italian FM (RT)
Trump Flip Flop on Ukraine Guarantees Nuke War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)
EU Officials Fear New ‘Franz Ferdinand Moment’ – Politico (RT)
Trump May Have Authorized Ukrainian Strikes Deep Inside Russia – Kellogg (RT)
Kellogg Says Trump Has Authorized NATO Strikes Against Moscow (CTH)
James Comey Tried to Take Down Trump (Victor Davis Hanson)
The Big Lebowski Civil War (James Howard Kunstler)
Trump Is About to Pull Off the Biggest Federal Workforce Cut in History (Margolis)
Is This the Man to Save the Democrats? (Stephen Green)
John Fetterman Throws His Party Under the Bus (Margolis)
UK Records Unprecedented Migrant Boat Arrival (RT)
Rowling Finally Gave Hermione the Spanking She Deserves (Green)

 

 

https://twitter.com/MdBreathe/status/1972472604025106792

https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1972651695353241979
https://twitter.com/BrianJBerletic/status/1972649650298450274


https://twitter.com/RussiaIsntEnemy/status/1972639433699844592
https://twitter.com/ivan_8848/status/1972689953898303815

 

 

 

 

We can dream, but…

Trump’s Plan For Gaza Could Affect Ukrainian Conflict — Witkoff (TASS)

The implementation of US President Donald Trump’s plan for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could create momentum that would help bring peace to other regions of the Middle East and also influence the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, US presidential special envoy Steve Witkoff said. “President [Trump] wants to see an overall peace. It’s not just about Gaza; it’s about how this might percolate into all other areas in the Middle East, and what it’s going to achieve, maybe even percolate into Russia and Ukraine,” he told Fox News in an interview, commenting on the plan proposed by the US authorities to resolve the conflict in the Palestinian enclave. Witkoff added that Trump’s initiative is supported by both the Persian Gulf countries and European states.

Earlier, the White House published a plan to resolve the conflict in the Gaza Strip. It calls for a complete cessation of hostilities and the release of hostages held by Hamas within 72 hours. In addition, the document proposes transferring the enclave to external administration for a transitional period. During this time, residents of the enclave would be given the opportunity to leave and return.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced at a press conference with Trump in Washington that he supports the US president’s plan to end military operations in Gaza. However, he noted that if Hamas rejects or sabotages the proposal, Israel will “finish the job by itself.”.

Read more …

OK OK, I’ll give it all the space it wants. But this reads like Bibi’s plan, maybe signed, maybe not, under the threat of more violence. Shaky.

Trump Unveils 20-Point Gaza Cease-Fire Plan (NYP)

President Trump formally unveiled a 20-point peace plan Monday calling for an international peacekeeping force in the Gaza Strip and a post-Hamas transitional government overseen by a “Board of Peace” — that Trump himself would lead as chairman. Trump, 79, announced the plan alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House and said it could bring “eternal peace in the Middle East” — with eight Muslim-majority countries and the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority quickly joining Israel in embracing the blueprint. “This is a beautiful day, potentially one of the great days ever in civilization,” Trump told reporters in the State Dining Room. “We discussed how to end the war in Gaza. But it’s just a part of the bigger picture, which is peace in the Middle East, and let’s call it eternal peace in the Middle East.”

The governments of Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates issued a rare joint statement praising the framework. The nations said they “welcome President Donald J. Trump’s leadership and his sincere efforts to end the war in Gaza” and “affirm their readiness to engage positively and constructively with the United States and the parties toward finalizing the agreement and ensuring its implementation.” The Palestinian Authority, which rules parts of the West Bank and lost a 2007 civil war with Hamas for control of Gaza, said: “The State of Palestine welcomes the sincere and determined efforts of President Donald J. Trump to end the war on Gaza and affirms its confidence in his ability to find a path toward peace.”

Trump warned, however, that Israel would have his permission to “finish the job” if Hamas refused to sign on to the plan, saying that “Israel would have my full backing” in subsequent fighting. Trump said at his press conference that “the leaders of the Arab world, Israel and everybody involved, asked me to” chair the proposed peace board board and floated the prospect of the deal leading to dramatic regional changes – including possible diplomatic relations between Israel and Iran. Netanyahu confirmed that his government had agreed to the provisions, adding that Israel would finish the war and end Hamas rule of Gaza “the easy way” or “the hard way.” In an interview with Qatar-based Al Jazeera following Trump’s and Netanyahu’s remarks, Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi claimed that Trump’s peace plan “has not reached us, nor has it reached any Palestinian party so far.

——-–
President Donald J. Trump’s Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict:

1. Gaza will be a deradicalized terror-free zone that does not pose a threat to its neighbors.
2. Gaza will be redeveloped for the benefit of the people of Gaza, who have suffered more than enough.
3. If both sides agree to this proposal, the war will immediately end. Israeli forces will withdraw to the agreed upon line to prepare for a hostage release. During this time, all military operations, including aerial and artillery bombardment, will be suspended, and battle lines will remain frozen until conditions are met for the complete staged withdrawal.
4. Within 72 hours of Israel publicly accepting this agreement, all hostages, alive and deceased, will be returned.
5. Once all hostages are released, Israel will release 250 life sentence prisoners plus 1700 Gazans who were detained after October 7th, 2023, including all women and children detained in that context. For every Israeli hostage whose remains are released, Israel will release the remains of 15 deceased Gazans.

6. Once all hostages are returned, Hamas members who commit to peaceful co-existence and to decommission their weapons will be given amnesty. Members of Hamas who wish to leave Gaza will be provided safe passage to receiving countries.
7. Upon acceptance of this agreement, full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip. At a minimum, aid quantities will be consistent with what was included in the January 19, 2025, agreement regarding humanitarian aid, including rehabilitation of infrastructure (water, electricity, sewage), rehabilitation of hospitals and bakeries, and entry of necessary equipment to remove rubble and open roads.
8. Entry of distribution and aid in the Gaza Strip will proceed without interference from the two parties through the United Nations and its agencies, and the Red Crescent, in addition to other international institutions not associated in any manner with either party. Opening the Rafah crossing in both directions will be subject to the same mechanism implemented under the January 19, 2025, agreement.
9. Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, responsible for delivering the day-to-day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza. This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the “Board of Peace,” which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members and heads of State to be announced, including Former Prime Minister Tony Blair. This body will set the framework and handle the funding for the redevelopment of Gaza until such time as the Palestinian Authority has completed its reform program, as outlined in various proposals, including President Trump’s peace plan in 2020 and the Saudi-French proposal, and can securely and effectively take back control of Gaza. This body will call on best international standards to create modern and efficient governance that serves the people of Gaza and is conducive to attracting investment.
10. A Trump economic development plan to rebuild and energize Gaza will be created by convening a panel of experts who have helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East. Many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas have been crafted by well-meaning international groups and will be considered to synthesize the security and governance frameworks to attract and facilitate these investments that will create jobs, opportunity, and hope for future Gaza.

11. A special economic zone will be established with preferred tariff and access rates to be negotiated with participating countries.
12. No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.
13. Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form. All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors, which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use through an agreed process of decommissioning, and supported by an internationally funded buy back and reintegration program all verified by the independent monitors. New Gaza will be fully committed to building a prosperous economy and to peaceful coexistence with their neighbors.
14. A guarantee will be provided by regional partners to ensure that Hamas, and the factions, comply with their obligations and that New Gaza poses no threat to its neighbors or its people.
15. The United States will work with Arab and international partners to develop a temporary International Stabilization Force (ISF) to immediately deploy in Gaza. The ISF will train and provide support to vetted Palestinian police forces in Gaza and will consult with Jordan and Egypt who have extensive experience in this field. This force will be the long-term internal security solution. The ISF will work with Israel and Egypt to help secure border areas, along with newly trained Palestinian police forces. It is critical to prevent munitions from entering Gaza and to facilitate the rapid and secure flow of goods to rebuild and revitalize Gaza. A deconfliction mechanism will be agreed upon by the parties.

16. Israel will not occupy or annex Gaza. As the ISF establishes control and stability, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) will withdraw based on standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization that will be agreed upon between the IDF, ISF, the guarantors, and the Unites States, with the objective of a secure Gaza that no longer poses a threat to Israel, Egypt, or its citizens. Practically, the IDF will progressively hand over the Gaza territory it occupies to the ISF according to an agreement they will make with the transitional authority until they are withdrawn completely from Gaza, save for a security perimeter presence that will remain until Gaza is properly secure from any resurgent terror threat.
17. In the event Hamas delays or rejects this proposal, the above, including the scaled-up aid operation, will proceed in the terror-free areas handed over from the IDF to the ISF.
18. An interfaith dialogue process will be established based on the values of tolerance and peaceful co-existence to try and change mindsets and narratives of Palestinians and Israelis by emphasizing the benefits that can be derived from peace.
19. While Gaza re-development advances and when the PA reform program is faithfully carried out, the conditions may finally be in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood, which we recognize as the aspiration of the Palestinian people.
20. The United States will establish a dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians to agree on a political horizon for peaceful and prosperous co-existence. [SOURCE]
The document released by the White House states that if all parties agree, “Gaza will be governed under the temporary transitional governance of a technocratic, apolitical Palestinian committee, responsible for delivering the day-to-day running of public services and municipalities for the people in Gaza.” “This committee will be made up of qualified Palestinians and international experts, with oversight and supervision by a new international transitional body, the ‘Board of Peace,’ which will be headed and chaired by President Donald J. Trump, with other members and heads of State to be announced,” the paper says.The only potential member Trump announced by name was former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who released a statement calling the plan “bold and intelligent.”

The proposal also calls for Hamas to return all hostages, alive or dead, within 72 hours of Israeli acceptance of the terms. In exchange, the Israelis would pull back their troops, offer the release of 250 Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences as well as 1,700 additional Gazans, and offer Hamas members amnesty if they commit to peace. The plan also has a provision to rid the Gaza government of Hamas officials, with the terror group having to agree to dismantle tunnels and weapons production facilities. Many significant details were not spelled out, including the size of a so-called International Stabilization Force (ISF) to handle security in Gaza post-Hamas and what nations would contribute troops. That force would “immediately deploy in Gaza” and bring “control and stability” to the battle-torn region, including patrolling its borders and training police.“My plan calls for the creation of a new international oversight body, the Board of Peace. We call it the board of peace, sort of a beautiful name,” Trump told the media.

“Working with the World Bank and others, it will be responsible for recruiting and training a new government that will be made up of Palestinians along with highly qualified experts from all around the world,” he went on. “Hamas and other terrorist factions will play no role in the board, they will play no role in the governance of Gaza at all, directly or indirectly.” The president described the board as a “temporary” measure that will only be in place as the Palestinian Authority undergoes a “reform program” tied to Trump’s Middle East peace plan of 2020. Gaza will also be flooded with humanitarian aid upon the signing of the treaty, including the rehabilitation of food, medical and transportation infrastructure.The economic rebuilding will be overseen by a “panel of experts” responsible for the construction of thriving cities in the Middle East. That group will discuss potential investment opportunities that will create jobs and “hope,” a White House readout said.
————-–
Unlike Trump’s February plan for an American-led takeover of Gaza, with the native population deported to allow for the construction of “the Riviera of the Middle East,” the new plan would not require Palestinians to leave their homeland. “No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return,” the document said. “We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.” The peace plan was announced just 11 days before the selection of this year’s Nobel Peace Prize honoree, which White House officials say should be Trump due to his role in sealing seven other agreements to stop armed conflicts. Analysts greeted the proposal with skepticism, with longtime Middle East observers noting one key obstacle. “Gaza must be a de-radicalized terror-free zone,” said former Trump National Security Council staffer Richard Goldberg, now a senior adviser at The Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “All hostages must come home within 72 hours. The rest is commentary.”

Read more …

“Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani.”

‘Putin Doesn’t Want World War III’ – Italian FM (RT)

Russian President Vladimir Putin is not interested in igniting a global conflict, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani said on Sunday, replying to claims that Moscow could send drones against the EU nation. Just a day earlier, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky claimed that Russia could target Italy or other European nations with drone attacks. This month, Poland and Estonia accused Moscow of breaching their airspace – accusations that Russia has dismissed as unfounded. “I don’t think Putin wants to start World War III, so I want to reassure all Italians,” Tajani said in a speech at a Forza Italia party event in Telese Terme on Sunday.

“I don’t believe Putin wants to send drones to swarm us,” he said, adding that he had discussed the subject with Italian Defense Minister Guido Crossetto that morning. In early September, Poland accused Russia of violating its airspace with a number of drones, with Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski later warning that any intrusions would be met with force. Moscow has stated that Warsaw’s accusations are baseless and argued that the incident was fabricated to derail the Ukraine peace process. According to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the drones allegedly found on Polish territory could not have been launched from Russia.

“If they are the ones we are thinking of, then their flight range is shorter than the distance from the border of the Russian Federation to the border with Poland,” he said on the sidelines of the 80th session of the UN General Assembly on Saturday. During his speech at the event, the top diplomat dismissed Western claims that Moscow is planning to attack NATO in the next few years. He also expressed concern that certain European bloc officials “are beginning to seriously talk about a third world war as a potential scenario.” Russia never intentionally launches missile or drone strikes toward members of the US-led military bloc, Lavrov stressed.

Read more …

“My computer says you are going to lose, and my computer has never been wrong. You can check it, and the CIA even wanted it. It’s got a 40-year track record you can document.”

Trump Flip Flop on Ukraine Guarantees Nuke War – Martin Armstrong (USAW)

The last time legendary financial and geopolitical cycle analyst Martin Armstrong was on USAWatchdog, he was hopeful that Trump would keep America out of the coming NATO War with Russia. Trump was talking about not sending troops to Ukraine for any peace deal, and before that, he said he backed a Russian plan to trade land for peace in Ukraine. Fast forward a month, and now, Trumps says, “Ukraine can win back its territory,” Russia is a “paper tiger,” and NATO countries should shoot down Russia aircraft. What a flip-flop on foreign policy!

To Trump’s credit, it is reported he did deny sending long range Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, but he is still sending a fresh batch of arms to NATO paid for with seized Russian money. What the heck is going on? Armstrong says, “It’s a double edge sword here. On one hand, he is being a bit sarcastic, and maybe if he says that somehow it will compel Putin to come to the table. Sorry, this is not negotiating trade issues. You are insulting the integrity of Russia saying it is a ‘paper tiger,’ etc. Everything Trump has said is exactly what the neocons have been saying. These EU leaders have been told that Russia is on the verge of collapse. . . .NATO has been telling them they have 3.4 million troops against Russia’s 1.5 million troops, and they can walk in and take Russia in a blink of an eye. This is the nonsense that they are putting out.”

This brings us to Armstrong’s predictive computer program called Socrates. Armstrong says, “I typed in here: Socrates, what are the prospects for nuclear war after 2025?” This is the first time Armstrong has let Socrates answer in an interview, and it says, “Marty, the prospects for nuclear war post 2025 appear to have risen to 100%. This may be tactical nuclear. All indicators show Ukraine remains the center point for Europe as a proxy war orchestrated by NATO. Ukraine will not survive as a country, and the European Union is also not likely to survive beyond 2030.”

Could Trump be one of the greatest President’s in history if he sidesteps this European war with Russia? Armstrong says, “Absolutely. The EU is not salvageable. I have been doing interviews in Europe, and three years ago, I was asked, ‘Do you really think the EU will break up?’ And now, I get, ‘When is it going to break up?’ . . .. These neocons will never accept any kind of a peace deal with Russia—period.” I asked Armstrong if he were to have a short one-on-one call with President Trump, what would you tell him? Armstrong says, “My computer says you are going to lose, and my computer has never been wrong. You can check it, and the CIA even wanted it. It’s got a 40-year track record you can document.”

What would Armstrong advise President Trump to do right now? Armstrong says, “I would tell President Trump to get the hell out of Europe, and get out the hell of NATO. I did pass a message to President Trump a few months ago with someone who is close to him. I said NATO is going to try to do a false flag to invoke an Article Five to drag us into the war. We have to get out of NATO ASAP.” On gold and silver and their big price increases lately, Armstrong says, “It’s not a surprise. They are going up because of war.” Armstrong predicts future price gains for both metals will explode, and on some instances start doubling in price. For example, on gold, Armstrong says, “When you cross $5,000 per ounce, and I am talking further out, these markets always jump exponentially to the next major psychological number. So, when you cross $5,000, it will jump to $10,000. That’s what everybody will be looking for then,” One last thing, Armstrong says, “China is on record to not let Russia lose to NATO, because if that happens, they are next.”

Read more …

Nostalgia?

EU Officials Fear New ‘Franz Ferdinand Moment’ – Politico (RT)

The EU is increasingly wary that tensions with Russia could spill into a major conflict, in a scenario some officials privately liken to the chain reaction following the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand that triggered World War I, Politico reported on Monday. EU leaders are poised to meet in Copenhagen on Wednesday to discuss ways to contain Russia amid a surge in drone incidents across Europe. According to Politico, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is pushing for an “unprecedented discussion” of the EU’s military posture, going well beyond the bloc’s usual remit to include projects such as a “drone wall” to neutralize UAVs deemed hostile.

The outlet notes that the summit participants are certain to agree that Russia poses a “threat” to the bloc, and sign up based on the sentiment that “doing nothing… makes all-out war more likely.” However, unnamed diplomats told Politico that potential moves to deter Russia are “strewn with potential disasters,” with some officials warning privately of a possible “Franz Ferdinand moment” – a sudden escalation that could drag the continent into conflict. The phrase refers to the 1914 assassination Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, which set off a rapid chain of alliances and ultimatums that triggered WWI. EU military leaders reportedly believe the bloc is already in a “form of low-intensity war with Russia,” adding that historically, wars have been financed with public debt. However, it could prove very difficult to persuade all EU members – some of which are already grappling with economic problems – to expand the bloc’s budget for defense, Politico said.

The heightened caution follows a recent episode in which Warsaw claimed Russian drones violated Polish airspace during strikes on Ukraine, prompting discussion in NATO about whether the bloc should shoot down intruding jets. Moscow has dismissed Warsaw’s accusations, saying it did not provide any evidence, while denouncing the debates on downing Russian planes as “irresponsible.” Moscow has on numerous occasions said that “Russia has no intention” to attack NATO while expressing concern over the fact that Western officials “are beginning to seriously talk about a third world war as a potential scenario.”

Read more …

They would be NATO strikes, not Ukraine.

Trump May Have Authorized Ukrainian Strikes Deep Inside Russia – Kellogg (RT)

US President Donald Trump may have already approved Ukrainian long-range strikes inside Russia, special envoy Keith Kellogg said on Sunday in an interview with Fox News. Kellogg, who is often described in the media as a pro-Kiev voice within Trump’s team, was asked about the president’s recent remark that Ukraine could recapture all the territory it has lost to Russia and “maybe even go further than that,” which the host interpreted as a sign of imminent long-range strikes. Ukraine must secure Washington’s approval to hit targets deep inside Russia with US-supplied weapons.

The first such permission was granted in November 2024 under President Joe Biden, shortly after Trump won that year’s election. Kellogg said the final call on any such request rests with Trump as commander-in-chief, noting that “sometimes the Ukrainians get some of these, sometimes they don’t.” Pressed on whether Trump supports Ukrainian strikes into Russia, Kellogg replied, “I think, reading what he has said and reading what Vice President [J.D.] Vance has said as well as [Secretary of State Marco] Rubio, the answer is, yes.” He added, “There are no such things as sanctuaries.”

Vance recently told Fox News that Trump is “certainly looking” at a renewed Ukrainian request for US-made Tomahawk cruise missiles. Kellogg said such weapons would allow Ukraine to deepen its reach inside Russian territory. The Kremlin has downplayed the potential impact of any Tomahawk deliveries. Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said no “wonder weapon” would change the battlefield dynamic, although he added that Ukrainian forces would likely be unable to operate Tomahawks without direct US involvement – something Moscow would consider a serious escalation.

Read more …

“The U.S. provides the missiles. The U.S. approves the missile locations in Ukraine. The U.S. authorizes the targets of the missiles from their location. NATO provides the satellite guidance system. Ukraine targets Moscow and launches the missiles. How is President Trump not directly responsible for a NATO proxy war against Russia?\”

Kellogg Says Trump Has Authorized NATO Strikes Against Moscow (CTH)

Ukraine is not a member of NATO. The United States is the leading force within NATO. Most recently President Trump has repeatedly said that he is brokering missile sales to NATO for transfer to, and use from, Ukraine against Russia. To wit, President Donald Trump has authorized NATO member states to deploy offensive missile systems into non-NATO Ukraine, provided by the U.S. In the latest development, U.S. Special Envoy for Ukraine General Keith Kellogg has announced Ukraine has the authority to launch those missile systems deep into Russia, including Moscow. According to General Kellogg, President Trump is authorizing NATO to strike Moscow with U.S. missiles, launched from Ukraine. How is Ukraine not a proxy war between NATO and Russia?

This is escalating madness. We are reasonably intelligent and pragmatic people. We have the objective capability to look at the issues from both sides of the equation. Look at this issue from the perspective of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The U.S. provides the missiles. The U.S. approves the missile locations in Ukraine. The U.S. authorizes the targets of the missiles from their location. NATO provides the satellite guidance system. Ukraine targets Moscow and launches the missiles. How is President Trump not directly responsible for a NATO proxy war against Russia?

The only way for President Trump to make the ‘accountability monkey’ jump now, is to exit NATO. The reason why the EU member states of NATO want escalated war with Russia is financial and economic. Through policy and ideology, the EU/NATO members have walked themselves into an economic dead end. They are out of assets to leverage. The only way out for the EU/NATO leadership is to create a war to erase debt, expand assets and reset the economics.

Read more …

When all else is said and done, he did.

James Comey Tried to Take Down Trump (Victor Davis Hanson)

I’d like to do something different today and the next day, and that is to do a two-part, short, little videos. One is on the moral implications of James Comey’s recent indictment, the former FBI director. And then, the legal ramifications. Even though I’m not a lawyer, I thought we could talk about the legal separately from the moral indications. James Comey was indicted by the Trump Justice Department on two counts. One, he allegedly had lied under oath to Congress that he had not authorized leaks to the press by FBI subordinates. Probably, in particular, Andrew McCabe, who admittedly lied four times, I think three times under oath, according to the inspector general of the DOJ. And a second count that he obstructed, by lying to Congress, a congressional investigation.

But there’s larger questions here. James Comey, remember, was the FBI director when he interfered in the 2016 election. He said that Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee who was running against Donald Trump, had broken the law by using an unsecure private server, in which classified material was transmitted. But he didn’t think a jury would convict her, or he didn’t think it led to a level of such seriousness. That’s not his decision, really. That’s the Department of Justice. He’s supposed to bring evidence. James Comey, remember, also, he met with Donald Trump. And they had a confidential conversation. That’s not in dispute. And James Comey assured the president of the United States that he was not the subject of an FBI investigation. That was false. Now, he may not have said that under oath, but he admitted he said that, and so did Donald Trump. They agree on that.

So, he lied to the president of the United States. And then what did he do? He took that conversation and “memorialized it.” And then he had four memos involving his interactions with the president. They were recorded on FBI machinery or devices, but he did not file them officially with the FBI. He put them in his private safe as safekeeping or insurance, so that he could embarrass the president of the United States, if he was ever threatened with firing. And so, what did he do? He took one of those memos and gave it to a friend, who happened to be a professor at Columbia, for the express purpose of leaking it, leaking it to The New York Times, and then he wouldn’t have his fingerprints.

So, while he is legally charged with this other incident or crime—if he’s proven guilty of leaking—he admitted that he had leaked information about the president of the United States. And he also, essentially, admitted that he wasn’t the object of an investigation, when he likely was. In addition to this, he was the one that hired Christopher Steele. Christopher Steele was working for Hillary Clinton through three paywalls: through the Democratic National Committee, through the Perkins Coie law firm, and through Fusion GPS. It’s against the law, in a presidential federal campaign, to hire a foreign national. He was on the payroll of the Clinton effort, he was also a contractor that James Comey hired, and he was the one who compiled this phony dossier.

In addition, James Comey was in the room with John Brennan and James Clapper when Barack Obama essentially said to them, both during the campaign, but even after the election of 2016: I don’t believe that your subordinate intelligence reports are accurate about not finding actionable Russian collusion. I want you to bring me something—I’m paraphrasing—that would show that Donald Trump was colluding. He also, you remember, he laughed when he said that he sent his FBI team to interview Michael Flynn. But the administration, in 2016, during their transition, was so inept, so unprepared, they didn’t even have a lawyer. So, Michael Flynn just welcomed him naively into his office, and he talked to them and he incriminated himself without counsel. Of course, the FBI people involved felt that he had been honest to them and had not tried to mislead them.

What am I getting at? All of these things that James Comey has been responsible for—the Russian collusion hoax; trying to frame Donald Trump, or I don’t know what you would call it, by memorializing a conversation, and then hiding it from the FBI files and leaking it, indirectly, to The New York Times; or having anything to do with this scoundrel, Christopher Steele; or trying to override intelligence estimates and try to fabricate something else; or giving special treatment to Hillary Clinton. But add it all up, at least, morally and ethically, he was bankrupt, absolutely bankrupt. Maybe not in the legal, strict sense, or not in—he couldn’t be prosecuted in a New York or Washington courtroom and get a guilty verdict from one of those juries. But he is morally culpable. Next time we’ll talk about his legal exposure.

Read more …

“We really are living through Bloody September” —Will Chamberlain.

The Big Lebowski Civil War (James Howard Kunstler)

When the newly-formed Confederacy attacked Fort Sumter in Charleston Bay, April 1861, they ignited the Civil War. They, at least, had a clearcut goal: to maintain an economy (and society) based on slavery. It was patently evil, but it was firmly established and it was their engine for daily life, and they didn’t want it to end. When Charlie Kirk was murdered in 2025, Civil War 2.0 kicked off. The enemy this time are not Confederates with a coherent command structure and a goal. They are an army of nihilists like the gang in The Big Lebowski, who, for one reason or another, have failed to launch lives of meaning and purpose, and so have adopted the purpose of destroying the country they cannot thrive in. Unlike The Big Lebowski, this is not a joke. But, it’s obviously a different sort of civil war than the first one.

It appears that many of these nihilists, especially the ones amalgamated as Antifa, are straight-up mentally ill — crazed young women too untamed to find a mate, many obese and self-mutilated like tattooed savages with steel bones in their noses. . . young men, hormones afire, likewise frustrated, escaping into sexual fetish and psychotic obsessions with demons, violence, blame, enmity. They are warriors for their own deformed ids. There is, for sure, plenty to complain about in American life as currently organized. It abounds with swindles and ruses, and much of the ill effect falls on young people who were rooked into college loans, are drowning in unpayable debt, are unable to find meaningful work in an economy dominated by cruelly gigantic companies, are unable to afford a place of their own to eat and sleep in, and whose bodies and minds are ravaged by junk food and pharma products.

Do not overlook the deleterious effects of the everyday environment we have created: the world of American suburbia. Above all, it requires a reliable car to even begin to function in, and that is beyond the reach of many newly-minted adults with no job or a shit-job. The sheer ugliness of American suburbia is punishing to human neurology. It induces anxiety and despair to a degree we can’t begin to reckon. Try walking a mile down a six-laner between the Sam’s Club and the DMV sometime. Suburbia atomizes social relations, making everyone an isolated unit and it defeats any attempt to form real communities. Its schools function like minimum security prisons, generators of anomie and ennui. On top of all that, suburbia has entered its arc of economic failure.

Even the gainfully employed middle-aged can no longer pay for it. It was built out of crappy materials that are falling apart now. A sane person would opt to not live in it, but since escape is so difficult from sea to shining sea, the other option is to go insane — especially if you’re just setting out in life. All of this discontent gets converted, abracadabra, into political ideology. The old, reliable package of Marxism works whenever people feel cheated out of meaning, purpose, and a livelihood. And so, this anguished cohort of the young, defeated in making a life, driven mentally ill by their surroundings, hounded by the endless prompts of their beloved smartphones, wrecked by the things they put in their bodies, and broken by their demoralizing failures, become the useful idiots of their political elders.

And the Democratic Party, having become little more than a grifting machine of hustles and hoaxes, uses the young to generate ever more ill-feeling across the land over issues that self-evidently are against the interests of the young — so that the party can survive its present existential crisis. It was not in young America’s interest to receive “Joe Biden’s” flood of illegal migrants across the border. Apart from their criminal histories, or the hidden agenda to form subversive cells for foreign enemies, the illegal migrants compete with young people in many realms of employment like the building trades, while they drive down wages generally. So why are the Antifas out there in front of the ICE facility affecting to “rescue” the deportees?

Because the mind-scrambling language of Marxian revolt has persuaded the Antifas that the illegal migrants are their “marginalized intersectional allies.” It’s bullshit, of course, but the mentally ill swallow it because they are desperate for meaning and filled with animus for all-and-any authority responsible for constructing and managing a system they have failed in. Mr. Trump, the primary demon in their fantasies, and certainly the enemy of the Democratic Party’s corrupt grifting machine, attempts to restore an economy based on producing things of value, rather than financial flimflams. The catch is, he may not be able to do that using the old armature of gigantic corporate organisms operating on rollover debt. That phase of history is probably over.

We need a new armature, but one based on voluntary exchange, which is to say economic liberty, not top-town communist-type centralized planning. Everywhere that has been tried, it failed and blew up. Euro-style Socialism Lite is not a workable choice anymore, either, because we are leaving behind the cheap energy economy and the geopolitical deals that made six-week vacations, retirement at 60, and free medicine possible.

Read more …

“..the government could shed roughly 275,000 employees by the end of 2025..”

Trump Is About to Pull Off the Biggest Federal Workforce Cut in History (Margolis)

The Trump administration just pulled off something most Americans probably didn’t think was possible: shrinking the federal bureaucracy in a massive and meaningful way. On Tuesday, more than 100,000 federal workers are expected to walk out the door through a deferred resignation program, marking the largest single-year reduction in the civilian federal workforce since World War II. Factor in layoffs, buyouts, early retirements, and natural attrition, and the government could shed roughly 275,000 employees by the end of 2025. Of course, the federal workforce is enormous—roughly 2.4 million employees, not counting postal workers—and not everyone qualifies for these programs. Military personnel, immigration enforcement officers, national security staff, NTSB employees, postal service workers, and several other categories are excluded. Even so, the reductions represent a historic reshaping of government employment.

This didn’t happen by accident. The Trump administration executed a deliberate strategy to cut spending; eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse; and push the federal workforce closer to an at-will employment model more typical of the private sector. It’s a bold move that challenges entrenched bureaucracy and signals a new era of accountability in Washington. The Economic Times has more. Trump administration officials defend the expenditure. The Office of Personnel Management stated the one-time costs reduce longer-term federal government spending. The agency also criticized job protections for federal civil servants, arguing the government should adopt a “modern, at-will employment framework like most employers.”

A White House spokesperson said there was “no additional cost to the government” because employees would have received their salaries regardless of the program. “In fact, this is the largest and most effective workforce reduction plan in history and will save the government $28bn annually,” the spokesperson added. The total number of expected departures through the delayed resignation and voluntary separation programs, attrition, and early retirement programs is approximately 275,000 employees, according to the spokesman. Sources told CNN earlier this year that OPM offered an early retirement incentive through the Voluntary Early Retirement Authority, or VERA, to employees who qualify and choose to participate in the deferred resignation program. To be eligible, workers must be at least 50 years old with 20 years of service—or any age with at least 25 years on the job.

What we’re witnessing is a permanent reduction of more than 10% in the civilian federal workforce. Agencies like the EPA and FEMA have offered voluntary buyouts to nearly all employees to speed up the process. Critics say this depletes institutional expertise and hurts morale. Supporters say it streamlines government, reduces regulatory burdens, and saves money. Legislative and legal efforts to stop the mass departures have largely failed. Congress faces a critical funding deadline on Tuesday, and agencies are already planning for additional large-scale firings if there’s a government shutdown. The Trump administration is making good on its promise to shrink the size and scope of the federal government, and the bureaucracy is feeling it.

If Washington can cut this deeply into its bloated bureaucracy and the sky doesn’t fall, then Americans should be demanding even more. For decades, politicians have promised to rein in government, only to hand us more waste and more debt. This moment proves it can actually be done, and voters must hold Washington accountable to deliver more of it.

Read more …

“Funny to think that Bill Clinton’s policies when he was President were essentially MAGA..,*

Is This the Man to Save the Democrats? (Stephen Green)

The Democrat who once quipped, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do [big government] things that you think you could not do before,” seems like an unlikely choice for tearing the party from the revolutionaries and radicals who increasingly make up its public face. But that’s exactly the case the Wall Street Journal made today about former White House advisor and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who “appears increasingly serious about running for president.” The Journal’s John McCormick wrote that while Emanuel’s “centrist message clashes with an insurgent progressive base mesmerized by figures such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Zohran Mamdani,” and other so-called Democratic Socialists, “the seriousness of Emanuel’s ambitions was obvious throughout his two-day visit” to — you guessed it — Des Moines, Iowa over the weekend.

“It was instructive to see Emanuel surrounded over the weekend by the Democratic base in Iowa where he headlined an annual party fish-fry fundraiser in the state’s largest county,” McCormick reported. “While he wasn’t technically campaigning, it was the first time the famously combative Emanuel had made a high-profile retail political appearance on his own behalf for the better part of a decade.” Politico’s writeup of the same Iowa appearance included Emanuel’s repetition of a centrist message that could have come right out of his time in the Clinton White House: The former White House chief of staff offered a message centered on economic fairness, education and affordability. “This should not come as a surprise to you,” Emanuel said from the stage set up at the home of Iowa state Rep. Sean Bagniewski, who hosted the fish fry in his front yard for 400 Democrats. “The American Dream is unaffordable. It’s inaccessible, and we, as Democrats, that’s unacceptable to us.”

Yet the Journal noted that “gone were his recent criticisms of his party’s brand as ‘toxic’ and ‘weak and woke.'” The 65-year-old — who will be pushing 70 during the next presidential race and hasn’t run for anything since 2018 — has to do something to appeal to younger voters, after all. I suppose the best thing a conservative could say about Rahm Emanuel is that his corruption is well within Chicago’s Daley-era norms, and that, unlike his party’s Young Turks, he isn’t bat-guano crazy. But here’s the thing about being a member of a party that almost reflexively finds itself on the 20% side of every 80/20 issue: maybe the 20% is exactly what their remaining voters want. While I’m not always a huge fan of the GOP dragging itself toward the center and away from some of its core conservative policies — “Funny to think that Bill Clinton’s policies when he was President were essentially MAGA*,” Elon Musk quipped on Sunday — there’s a noteworthy silver lining.

A more centrist GOP effectively isolates Democrat radicals inside their shrunken, 80/20 party, where they’re less able to inflict serious damage outside the Deep Blue zones. It’s a huge win for the country, and we should be happy to take it. *At least on crime, welfare, and immigration.Maybe I’m wrong about this, but Emanuel’s effort has a bit of a Springsteen “Glory Days” feel to it. “Hey, remember when things were great under Clinton? Remember the Lightbringer? I remember!” Or maybe Emanuel is just the pol to pull the Dems back toward the center. He’s one of the few Obama-era people with name recognition (at least with the money people), and without any major ties to Obama’s Red Diaper radicalism. But the problem with being the one-eyed man in the land of the blind is that they’ll probably poke your eye out. Good luck, Rahm — you’ll need it.

Read more …

“..It’s always wrong to shut our government down.”

John Fetterman Throws His Party Under the Bus (Margolis)

John Fetterman is throwing his own party under the bus, and frankly, it’s about time a Democrat did so. The Pennsylvania senator delivered a reality check, calling out the left’s tired playbook of labeling every Republican opponent a “Nazi” or “fascist.” During an appearance on Sunday Morning Futures on Fox News, Fetterman indicated that he won’t participate in the Democratic Party’s increasingly unhinged rhetoric. While his colleagues foam at the mouth with hyperbolic accusations, Fetterman positioned himself as an independent voice willing to break ranks when his party loses its collective mind. He’s not switching parties, but he’s certainly not drinking the Kool-Aid either. On Sunday, Fetterman sat down with Maria Bartiromo and said he has no intention of leaving the Democratic Party. However, he also stressed that he won’t hesitate to go against the party line when he feels it’s the right thing to do.

“I’m not going to switch, you know?” He said. “But I, I’m just going to be an independent voice in the Democratic Party.” He insisted that standing apart from the more radical elements in his party was important, saying, “I’m not gonna be afraid if people… I mean, and, and if there are groups a-attacking a, a Democrat, you know, the last one in Pennsylvania, then that’s… To me, that’s part of the problem, you know, in our party.” Fetterman also pushed back on the toxic rhetoric that has become standard on the left. “And if you want a Democrat that’s gonna call people Nazis or fascists or all these kinds of thing, well, I’m not gonna be that guy.” Instead, he cast himself as someone who would speak the truth even if it didn’t align with his party’s agenda:

“You know, independent thinking and views, wherever I happen to believe the truth, regardless if it’s the Republican or the Democratic voice, you know? But I think it’s the truth in this. Now, in this truth right now, it’s firmly on Israel through this, and it’s also… It’s always wrong to shut our government down.” Fetterman admitted that his positions might set him apart but said he’s comfortable with that. “And that’s where my voice is and if that puts me as an outlier, then, you know, that’s where I am.” Democrats face mounting criticism for their inflammatory language and divisive tactics, and Fetterman is the one choosing to be the adult in a room full of tantrum-throwing toddlers.

The senator’s departure from Democratic orthodoxy extends well beyond his refusal to take part in dangerous name-calling. His unwavering support for Israel during the ongoing conflict has put him at odds with the progressive wing of his party, many of whom seem more interested in appeasing Hamas sympathizers than supporting America’s democratic ally in the Middle East. Fetterman criticized efforts to recognize a Palestinian state, correctly identifying such moves as rewarding terrorism. Fetterman has also been critical of his party’s shutdown strategy. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer tries to pin blame on Republicans, Fetterman pointed out that it’s actually the Democrats who would be responsible. Unlike his colleagues, who seem to believe their media allies will always provide cover, Fetterman recognizes that voters notice when politicians create chaos and then try to blame others.

Read more …

It’s Farage’s country now.

UK Records Unprecedented Migrant Boat Arrival (RT)

A small boat carrying 125 people crossed the English Channel from France to the UK on Saturday, the largest number ever recorded on a single vessel, Bloomberg has reported, citing the Home Office. The previous record was set in August, when 107 people arrived on what the British media described as a “mega-dinghy.” The latest crossing comes despite Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s pledge to “smash” the smuggling gangs behind the journeys. It also follows the appointment of new Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, who has called small boat crossings “utterly unacceptable” and promised to “explore all options” to address the issue. Official figures show that around 33,000 people have crossed into the UK since the start of the year, the highest total for this point in the year since records began in 2018, according to The Independent.

Public discontent over illegal migration has grown sharply in Britain, with polls showing it among voters’ top concerns. Many see the rising number of crossings as evidence the government has lost control of the borders, while communities voice frustration over pressures on housing, health services, and schools. The discontent has boosted support for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party, which has made hardline immigration its central message. A recent YouGov poll put Reform in the lead with 29%, ahead of Labour on 21%. Labour has pledged to target people-smuggling networks while keeping legal migration routes, framing its approach as a balance of security and humanitarian obligations. In August, the UK and France ratified a treaty which states that migrants deemed inadmissible after arriving in Britain can be returned to France, while the UK accepts an equal number of asylum seekers via a legal route. The first removals under the scheme took place earlier this month.

The Reform party advocates abolishing Indefinite Leave to Remain, forcing settled migrants to reapply under stricter conditions, and limiting welfare benefits to British citizens. In an interview on Sunday, Starmer called Farage’s proposals “racist” and “immoral,” though he admitted many drawn to Reform are frustrated by the slow pace of change.

Read more …

Good word: “transanity”..

Rowling Finally Gave Hermione the Spanking She Deserves (Green)

In happier times, child actress Emma Watson brought J.K. Rowling’s beloved Hermione character to life in the Harry Potter movies, beginning in 2001 when Watson was just 11 years old. She’s a big girl now but in serious need of a spanking — one that Rowling just belatedly, reluctantly, and devastatingly applied. Seriously, it might be weeks before Watson can sit down comfortably again. “Emma and [and Harry Potter costar Daniel Radcliffe] in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right – nay, obligation – to critique me and my views in public,” Rowling posted to X on Monday. “Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.”

Ouch. Now 35, Watson spent years using public appearances and social media to take digs at Rowling and her so-called transphobia. “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are,” Watson tweeted in response to Rowling in 2020. And that was really just the start.For her part, Rowling has long used her fame and fortune to stand up for the sanctity of women’s spaces and women’s sports — even at the height of transanity. “Here to present the next award is Emma Watson,” BAFTA Awards host Rebel Wilson announced that same year. “She calls herself a feminist, but we all know she’s a witch.” After taking the stage, Watson smiled and said, “I’m here for all the witches,” in reference to Rowling’s recognition that men aren’t women.

“I wasn’t a multimillionaire at fourteen,” Rowling reminded Watson today. “I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women’s rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.” Rowling remembers 2020 as a time “when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak.” She continued, “Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.” Rowling later said she would “never forgive” Watson — or co-stars Radcliffe and Rupert Grint — for having “cozied up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights.”

Rowling’s post today was more in sorrow than in anger, however: The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me – a change of tack I suspect she’s adopted because she’s noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was – I might never have been this honest. Stay honest, J.K. — women (and men) need to hear more of that from you.

I wasn’t aware of this until today, but Watson’s acting career appears to be dead in the water. She’s had only a baker’s dozen appearances since the last Harry Potter film debuted almost 15 years ago, including two single-episode appearances on TV. Her most recent film role was in 2019’s Little Women, and her last role, period, was in a 2022 short called “Prada Paradoxe,” which she directed herself and had no other actors. She’s currently attending Oxford in pursuit of a post-grad degree, but that hardly explains a film career long in decline. Watson isn’t hurting for money after all the success she enjoyed as a child, so maybe it’s relevance she’s trying to get with all the outbursts against her former benefactor. If it’s attention she wanted, she just got it — forcefully.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/catsscareme2021/status/1972635771560669676

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 282025
 


Cave of swimmers, Gilf Kebir plateau, Sahara c6000 BCE

 

The Endgame of the Ukraine War: Two Possible Scenarios (Ruel F. Pepa)
Ukraine Peace Talks Must Stay Confidential – Kremlin (RT)
Witkoff to Meet Ukrainians in New York This Week (ET)
Most Americans Don’t Believe Trump Can End Wars In Ukraine, Gaza (ZH)
RFK Aims to MAHA Med School (Salgado)
FDA Revokes Emergency Authorization For COVID-19 Vaccines (ZH)
US Disease Control Chief Fired In Clash Over Covid Vaccines (RT)
Gabbard: Intel Community Corruption Worse Than Anyone Thought (VF)
Trump Calls For RICO Charges Against Soros; Gates Foundation Severs Ties (ZH)
Trump Mulls Travel Ban for EU Officials Over ‘Orwellian’ Censorship Law (ZH)
Reform’s Plan for Dealing with Illegal Migrants is a Good Start (Carl)
Multiculturalism Is Burning Down The German School System (RMX)
Merz: German Welfare State Is Running Out of Other People’s Money (Kruiser)
The Radical Left Is Still Trying to Get Trump Assassinated (Margolis)
Intel Deal: Trump’s Industrial Policy Is Realism, Not Socialism (Daniel McCarthy)
It’s Official: Bill Gates Now Contains 2% Less Bond Villain (Green)

 

 

CBDC

Crime

 

 

The author, a “Filipino philosopher living in Madrid, Spain”, gives you two endgame options to choose from:

1/ The west acknowledges defeat now.
2/ Russia launches a devastating though non-nuclear attack, and the west folds after that.

Take your pick. Both options lead to a period of peace. There is no third option.

The Endgame of the Ukraine War: Two Possible Scenarios (Ruel F. Pepa)

Scenario One: Acknowledgment of Defeat and Surrender by the West
The first possibility hinges on a sobering and potentially unsettling reality: the Western alliance of the United Kingdom, the European Union, NATO, and the United States should finally recognize the reality that they have tragically lost the fight against Russia in Ukraine. This recognition would not be made lightly; rather, it would be the result of a combination of factors such as prolonged conflict, mounting casualties, significant resource depletion, and diplomatic fatigue that have eroded Western resolve and capacity to sustain their current level of support. Ultimately, this scenario would necessitate a formal acknowledgment of defeat, leading to a strategic and possibly humiliating surrender, signaling an end to their worthless military and political efforts to oppose Russian advances.

Such an outcome implies that the West’s military interventions, economic sanctions, and diplomatic efforts have failed to change the fundamental dynamics on the ground. The prolonged conflict, with its heavy toll on both human lives and national resources, would have culminated in a consensus that further confrontation is futile or counterproductive. Recognizing defeat would most likely lead to negotiations, compromises, and concessions that could reshape the territorial and political landscape of the region. This could include the recognition of Russian-controlled territories as part of Russia, or a negotiated settlement that cedes significant influence to Moscow.

This scenario would also entail a vital shift in regional alliances and borders, marking the end of Ukraine’s aspirations for full integration into Western institutions. It would result in a realignment of security arrangements and a recalibration of Western policies towards Russia, which would finally acknowledge Russia’s renewed regional importance and influence. Ultimately, this outcome would bring an end to active hostilities and redefine the balance of power in Europe and beyond. The global order would see a shift towards a more multipolar world, where Russia’s enhanced position influences international diplomacy and security policies for years to come.

Scenario Two: A Devastating Russian Non-Nuclear Strike
The second more provocative and alarming possibility involves Russia resorting to the use of its advanced non-nuclear weapon systems, specifically the deployment of the non-nuclear version of the Oreshnik missile system, targeting Ukraine and one aggressive NATO member country such as Germany, France, Poland, or the UK, thereby achieving a decisive and devastating victory over western aggression. This aggressive attack would be designed to inflict maximum destruction and psychological shock.

This scenario assumes that barring the possibility of the West’s surrender, Russia’s only remaining option is to escalate the conflict by deploying such a formidable weapon to indiscriminately obliterate Ukrainian infrastructure and military targets. The use of a weapon like the Oreshnik which is indubitably recognized as a highly destructive missile capable of delivering a significant payload over long distances would mark a new and dangerous phase in the conflict, aimed at delivering a crushing blow to Ukraine’s military capacity and civilian infrastructure.

The implications of such an act are profoundly chilling. It would signal a willingness by Russia to cross the threshold into large-scale destruction, possibly as a show of strength or as a means to force Western powers into concessions. Importantly, Russia’s use of such devastating weaponry is intended not only to break Ukraine’s resistance but also to test the resolve and limits of Western alliances. It will serve as a strategic warning, demonstrating that Russia is willing to unleash destruction on a scale that could also threaten member states or their interests, thereby challenging the post-Cold War security architecture of Europe.

Crucially, such a strike on a NATO country could absolutely trigger a wave of terror and paralysis across Europe. The severity and immediacy of the attack is aimed at inducing extreme fear among European nations, potentially leading to a strategic stalemate where retaliation becomes unthinkable, either due to the devastating consequences or the chaos that ensues. This scenario hinges on the premise that Russia’s willingness to escalate to such an extent would effectively paralyze NATO and European responses, thereby ending the war through sheer overwhelming force and fear. Simply put, such an ultimate and decisive attack would cancel all the risks of hostility escalation and broader conflict thereby inaugurating and guaranteeing global peace and security once and for all.

Read more …

”Talking about the specifics publicly and outside of the broader context of the conflict would hardly be beneficial for our common goal..”

Ukraine Peace Talks Must Stay Confidential – Kremlin (RT)

Public discussion of the details of Ukraine peace negotiations could harm the process, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday when asked what compromises Russia might be prepared to offer. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told NBC News last week that Moscow is ready to “show some flexibility” on Ukraine after the recent Alaska summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump. US Vice President J.D. Vance later told the same program that Trump’s “energetic diplomacy” had convinced Moscow to offer “significant concessions.” Peskov reiterated that the Putin-Trump talks marked a diplomatic breakthrough but stressed that Moscow intends to keep details of the negotiations confidential.

”Talking about the specifics publicly and outside of the broader context of the conflict would hardly be beneficial for our common goal. We believe such work should be done privately, if we are to produce results,” he said. Lavrov was repeatedly pressed on NBC’s Meet the Press about whether Putin would commit to direct talks with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. The foreign minister reminded the host that Putin had not ruled out such a meeting, but insisted it would need to be meaningful. ”Yes, he [Putin] is ready to meet, but no, we cannot meet just for him [Zelensky] to have a picture and to say that, ‘now I am legitimate’,” Lavrov said.

Russia’s top diplomat was referring to the expiration of Zelensky’s presidential mandate last year. Moscow has raised questions about the legality of any international agreements he might sign. Peskov reinforced Lavrov’s remarks, saying any top-level contacts between Russia and Ukraine “need to be properly prepared to be resultful.” He added that Russia “remains committed to resolving the Ukraine conflict, preferably through peaceful political-diplomatic means.”

Read more …

“I think he has made a good faith effort to engage. He certainly did at the Alaska summit. But it’s a very complicated conflict.”

Witkoff to Meet Ukrainians in New York This Week (ET)

U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff said he is set to meet with Ukrainian representatives in the United States this week during an interview on Aug. 26. “I’m meeting with the Ukrainians this week. So I will be meeting with them this week in New York, and that’s a big signal,” Witkoff said on Fox News’s “Special Report” with Bret Baier. “We talk to the Russians every day,” he said, adding that he believed Russian President Vladimir Putin wished to bring the war to a close. “I think he has made a good faith effort to engage. He certainly did at the Alaska summit. But it’s a very complicated conflict. “I think that we may end up seeing a bilateral meeting. My own opinion is that the president is going to be needed at the table to finish a deal.” U.S. President Donald Trump met with Putin in Alaska on Aug. 15 and later with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House on Aug. 18.

In the wake of those summits, Trump said the two leaders would hold a bilateral meeting, which would then be followed by a trilateral meeting including him. Zelenskyy has said Russia was doing everything it could to prevent a meeting between him and Putin, while Russia has said the agenda for such a meeting was not ready. On Aug. 24, U.S. Vice President JD Vance said that Moscow has made “significant concessions” toward reaching a peace deal to end the more than three-year conflict between Russia and Ukraine. In an interview with NBC News’s “Meet the Press,” the vice president said Putin made multiple concessions toward reaching a deal with Kyiv, including one that allows Ukraine to receive security guarantees to ward off future attacks. Vance said that the Russians have “recognized that they’re not going to be able to install a puppet regime in Kyiv,” noting it was “a major demand at the beginning.”

“And importantly, they’ve acknowledged that there is going to be some security guarantee to the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” he said. “Have they made every concession? Of course, they haven’t. We’re making progress.” The violence between Moscow and Kyiv continued overnight, with a Russian drone attack damaging an energy sector facility in Ukraine’s central Poltava, the region’s governor said on Aug. 27. “This night, the enemy massively attacked the Poltava region,” Gov. Volodymyr Kohut said on Telegram. “Falling debris and direct hits were recorded in the Poltava district. An energy sector enterprise was damaged. An administrative building, vehicles, and equipment were damaged. Fires broke out on the territory of the enterprise.” He added that consumers had temporarily lost power as a result of the attack and that “fortunately, there were no casualties.”

The nighttime aerial assault also shut off power in parts of the northern city of Sumy after Russia struck critical infrastructure facilities, leaving all water utility facilities without power and relying on emergency backups on Aug. 26, according to a Telegram post from Serhii Kryvosheienko, the head of the Sumy city military administration. “Restoration efforts are now underway in the Sumy region after Russian drone strikes,” Zelenskyy said in a post on X on Aug. 26 discussing the attack. “Nearly a hundred UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] and targeted overnight attacks on our regions, aimed specifically at civilian infrastructure.” “The Russians continue the war and ignore the world’s calls to stop the killings and destruction,” he added, calling for “new steps” to “increase pressure” on Moscow to “stop the attacks and to ensure real security guarantees.”

The Ukrainian Air Force said it downed 74 out of 95 Shahed drones overnight, and that 21 drones hit nine locations across the country. Russia, meanwhile, said that its air defenses intercepted and destroyed 26 Ukrainian drones over the country through the night, according to Moscow’s Defense Ministry.At least seven apartment buildings were damaged in a drone attack on the Russian city of Rostov-on-Don, located about 60 miles from the border with Ukraine, Russian state news agency TASS reported.

Read more …

But they want him to try anyway.

Most Americans Don’t Believe Trump Can End Wars In Ukraine, Gaza (ZH)

Most Americans are doubtful that President Donald Trump will be able to help bring an end to the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Gaza, despite the US being the largest military supporter of both Ukraine and Israel, which naturally would give Trump potential influence over Kyiv and Tel Aviv. But the reality is for all the talk of peace, the White House has not used this powerful lever (that is, cutting off the arms pipeline and billions in aid).The CAPS-Harris poll is a joint project of Harris Poll and the Center for American Political Studies at Harvard University. It conducted a fresh survey on a range of issues facing the American public and politics at the national and international levels.

The survey showed that 59% of respondents believe Trump would be unsuccessful in resolving the war in Ukraine, while 64% say he would be unable to bring an end to the conflict in Gaza. But despite this broad skepticism concerning the end-result, two-thirds of Americans still support Trump’s initiative to negotiate a resolution to the war in Ukraine. The survey indicated it was conducted online within the United States on August 20-21 – among 2,025 registered voters, and so it was days after Trump’s historic summit with Putin in Alaska. The polling shows that Americans saw the effort of direct US-Russia talks in a positive light. So far, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has firmly rejected any territorial compromises, and there’s no indication that the Trump White House has piled much pressure on him to do so.

But Trump is pushing for NATO-style security guarantees for Ukraine, which the Kremlin is in turn rejecting this (assuming it involves Western boots on the ground). Responsible Statecraft describes: Rather than seeking security for all, Europe is still seeking partial security, only for Ukraine. This short-sightedness stems from the desire to punish Russia, which argues that it is only defending its national interests. It is telling that, toward the end of their joint press conference, Putin said he agreed with Trump’s claim that this war could have been prevented if Trump had been president. Many saw this as a throw-away line designed to ingratiate himself to Trump, but I believe that Putin was remarking on how different Trump’s approach to the conflict is from that of his predecessor.

While Biden saw NATO as an unvarnished force for good; Trump appears to appreciate that it can also be seen as a threat, especially by those who have been excluded from it. As for the other major raging conflict, the same poll found that most Americans believe there is a famine occurring in Gaza but that they hold Hamas responsible. This is certainly not a long-term solution, but likely recipe for continual escalation…[..] International human rights organizations, and the Palestinian side, have frequently accused Israel of deliberately creating famine conditions through its military campaign and blockade of Gaza. The American public has of late (as well as the mainstream media) grown more critical of Israel’s actions, but both sides of the political aisle and population tend to remain ‘pro-Israel’.

Read more …

“..poor diet drives America’s chronic disease crisis, fueling seven of our 10 deadliest conditions each year, [which] claims an estimated 1 million American lives through diet-related illnesses.”

RFK Aims to MAHA Med School (Salgado)

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. proudly announced that medical schools, which receive federal funds and grants, will now be asked to incorporate diet education into their curricula to address related chronic disease. In his announcement Wednesday, Kennedy quoted Hippocrates, “the father of medicine,” who said, “Let food be thy medicine, and medicine be thy food.” Kennedy interprets this to mean that Americans should try to treat more chronic diseases by adjusting their diet rather than always taking pills, and he says that right now, medical schools often provide little to no nutrition training to many surgeons. The Trump administration’s “bold reform in our medical education system” will involve both HHS and the Department of Education to address “a situation that everyone has long recognized as wrong, but no one has yet had the gumption to fix,” Kennedy said.

The secretary slammed the “woeful lack of nutrition education in medicine” and argued, “poor diet drives America’s chronic disease crisis, fueling seven of our 10 deadliest conditions each year, [which] claims an estimated 1 million American lives through diet-related illnesses.” And with over $4 trillion being spent every year to treat what Kennedy calls “these preventable diseases,” he believes we should not “graduate physicians unprepared to confront their root cause.” The HHS secretary added, “The good news is that diet not only causes these conditions, it can also prevent and reverse them. But for too long, we’ve instead analyzed the chronic disease crisis, commissioned studies, and pontificated about the importance of nutrition without taking any meaningful action. Recent data reveals a critical disconnect.”

The answer is education, Kennedy said. “Although all medical schools claim to include nutrition in their curricula, most medical students report receiving no formal nutrition education throughout their entire training,” he stated. “This leads to a troubling reality. Most medical students recognize nutrition is necessary. Nearly all medical residents are asked to counsel patients about nutrition. [But] fewer than a quarter of practicing physicians feel adequately prepared to provide nutrition advice.” Kennedy is optimistic that the diet-related chronic disease “epidemic” can become a tragedy of the past with proper diets and lifestyle adjustments, which doctors should be able to recommend. “We’ll start by embedding nutrition directly into college pre-med programs and testing it on the MCAT. Every future physician should master the language of prevention before they even touch a stethoscope,” Kennedy insisted.

Ultra-processed foods, unhealthy lifestyles, and too great a medical reliance on Big Pharma have contributed to making many Americans chronically unhealthy. “Under President Trump’s leadership, we are going to systematically transform nutrition education throughout American medicine for more than 200 of America’s medical schools, 13,000 residency and fellowship programs, and ultimately, each of the nation’s 1.1 million practicing physicians,” Kennedy laid out his ambitious plan. He enthusiastically predicted, “In the future, doctors won’t just prescribe drugs, they’ll be able to prescribe diets as well by confidently screening for diet-related diseases and collaborating with nutrition experts to recommend food-based solutions.” As the cherry on top, Kennedy hopes the reforms will ultimately save America “hundreds of billions of dollars and prevent millions of debilitating chronic diseases… We’re going to reconnect medicine with its roots.”

Read more …

“..to keep vaccines available to people who want them, to require placebo-controlled trials, and to “end the emergency.”

FDA Revokes Emergency Authorization For COVID-19 Vaccines (ZH)

The Department of Health and Human Services under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. revoked emergency authorization for COVID-19 vaccines. “The emergency use authorizations for Covid vaccines, once used to justify broad mandates on the general public during the Biden administration, are now rescinded,” Kennedy posted to X on Wednesday. The news comes as the FDA, which is part of HHS, announced the approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for older adults and children as young as 5-years-old who have at least one condition that puts them at higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, Pfizer said in a Wednesday statement. Regulators have issued similar approvals for COVID-19 jabs from Novavax and Moderna.

HHS revoking emergency approval means that FDA clearance is no longer in place for some 240 million Americans, however “These vaccines are available for all patients who choose them after consulting with their doctors,” Kennedy sai. As the Epoch Times notes further, per federal law, the FDA approves products it determines are “safe, pure, and potent.” Emergency authorizations, in contrast, can only be offered under certain circumstances, such as during a public health emergency, and are for products that officials believe “may be effective” in treating or preventing a life-threatening disease or condition. Dr. Marty Makary, the FDA’s commissioner, and Dr. Vinay Prasad, its top vaccine official at the time, signaled the change in May, when they said that the FDA would stop approving COVID-19 vaccines for many Americans absent clinical trial data.

“The FDA can only approve products if it concludes, based on scientific evidence, that the benefit-to-harm balance is favorable. And we simply need more data to have that confidence for younger individuals at low-risk of severe disease,” Prasad said at the time. In the United States, regulators in recent years have been authorizing updated COVID-19 vaccines annually in a bid to counter waning effectiveness and better match circulating variants. The model is based on the historical approach to influenza vaccines. Regulators in 2024 cleared updated shots from Moderna, Pfizer, and Novavax without human data, citing animal tests and data from trials for previous versions. Most Americans have not taken one of those COVID-19 vaccines. Just 13 percent of children and 23 percent of adults had received one of them as of April 26, according to the latest statistics available from the CDC.

Makary and Prasad also said they would continue approving updated versions of the COVID-19 vaccines for all individuals 65 and older, as well as younger people with one or more of the risk factors that increase the likelihood of severe COVID-19 outcomes. These approvals would be based solely on immunobridging data, or testing that shows vaccines trigger an antibody response against the disease. Around that time, the FDA approved Novavax’s vaccine, previously under emergency use authorization, for people 65 and older, and for individuals ages 12 to 64 with at least one risk factor. More recently, the agency approved a new Moderna vaccine for the same populations, and Moderna’s existing vaccine for the elderly and for individuals aged 6 months to 64 years who have at least one risk factor. The new approval of Pfizer’s vaccine is for the elderly and people aged 5 to 64 who have one or more risk factors, Pfizer said.

That means Moderna’s vaccine is the only one available for infants and toddlers, as had been expected. Also recently, the CDC stopped recommending COVID-19 vaccination for healthy children and pregnant women while keeping in place recommendations to receive a shot for all other individuals.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently recommended that all children aged 6 months to 23 months receive a COVID-19 vaccine, while the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists advised all pregnant women to get one. Regulators cited the public health emergency over COVID-19 in their most recent emergency authorizations for the COVID-19 vaccines in 2024. Then-Health Secretary Xavier Becerra on Jan. 1 extended the COVID-19 health emergency to Dec. 31, 2029. Kennedy said on Wednesday that he promised to end COVID-19 vaccine mandates, to keep vaccines available to people who want them, to require placebo-controlled trials, and to “end the emergency.” The FDA actions “accomplished all four goals,” he said.

Read more …

Q: why was she ever hired? Certainly this must have been predictable?!

US Disease Control Chief Fired In Clash Over Covid Vaccines (RT)

The White House has dismissed Susan Monarez as director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) after she refused to resign in a dispute over vaccine policy, with her ouster triggering turmoil and further resignations by senior health officials. Monarez, who was confirmed by the Senate just last month, reportedly clashed with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. over his push to lift vaccine mandates and rescind emergency authorizations. “Susan Monarez is not aligned with the President’s agenda of Making America Healthy Again,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement on Wednesday, adding that she was terminated after refusing to step down voluntarily.

Her lawyers, Mark Zaid and Abbe Lowell, disputed the White House account, insisting Monarez “has neither resigned nor received notification” of her dismissal. They accused Kennedy of “weaponizing public health for political gain and putting millions of American lives at risk,” warning that her case highlights the “systematic dismantling of public health institutions.” The clash came as the Food and Drug Administration approved new variants of Moderna and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines, while rescinding emergency use authorizations and restricting the shots to higher-risk groups. Kennedy, a longtime critic of US vaccination policy, has overseen sweeping changes since becoming HHS secretary earlier this year, including disbanding vaccine advisory committees and cutting funding for mRNA research. In a post on X, he said the new framework “delivers science, safety, and common sense.”

Monarez resisted pressure to endorse the changes or dismiss senior colleagues. According to multiple reports, she reached out to Senate Health Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy, whose support was pivotal during Kennedy’s confirmation hearings. At least four senior CDC officials resigned in protest: Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, immunization director Demetre Daskalakis, infectious disease chief Daniel Jernigan, and data director Jennifer Layden. Monarez had been nominated by President Donald Trump as his second choice after withdrawing former congressman Dave Weldon, who faced criticism over his vaccine views. Under a law passed during the pandemic, the CDC director now requires Senate confirmation.

Read more …

“Transparency is FINALLY coming and what’s buried inside those bags could shake the nation.”

Gabbard: Intel Community Corruption Worse Than Anyone Thought (VF)

As Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard has spent months shaking Washington with bombshell after bombshell on the Russia Coup of 2017. When Trump asked her to speak [during this week’s cabinet meeting], she told him that the intel community’s corruption was worse than anyone thought. She doubled down on her mission statement of transparency. Gabbard: “Mr. President, you have charged me with the mission of finding the truth and telling the truth to the American people, and we’ve exposed some of the worst examples of the weaponization of intelligence in the last several weeks.” “I will continue down that mission and that path, wherever it leads.

Transparency, telling the truth is what will drive true accountability for the American people who deserve nothing less.” Then Trump dropped a jaw-dropper of his own. He revealed that Gabbard’s team had recovered unburned “burn bags” stuffed with classified material tied to the 2020 election…and asked when the public would see them. Trump: “And you’ve also found many bags of information, I think they call them burn bags. They’re supposed to be burned and they didn’t get burned having to do with how corrupt the 2020 election was, and when will that all come out?” Gabbard: “Mr. President, I will be the first to brief you once we have that information collected.”

“But you’re right – we are finding documents literally tucked away in the back of safes, in random offices, in these bags and in other areas, which, again, speaks to the intent of those who are trying to hide the truth from the American people and trying to cover up the politicization that was led by people like John Brennan and James Clapper and others that have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to our country.” Wow. Transparency is FINALLY coming and what’s buried inside those bags could shake the nation.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1960437106767224919

Read more …

Arabella is the mothership of over 200 NGOs.

Trump Calls For RICO Charges Against Soros; Gates Foundation Severs Ties (ZH)

The “dark money” network operated by Arabella Advisors has reportedly lost one of its top funding sources: a leftist billionaire’s foundation. Equally significant in the news cycle this morning, President Trump stated on Truth Social that George Soros and his radical leftist son, Alex Soros, “should be charged with RICO because of their support of violent protests.” A New York Times report indicates that the Gates Foundation has halted funding to nonprofit funds managed by Arabella, choosing instead to work directly with some partners rather than through intermediaries. In its internal announcement, dated June 24 and sent to some Gates employees who oversee grant programs, foundation officials did not mention politics. Instead, they cited a desire to engage more directly with grant recipients and cut back on the use of intermediaries like Arabella entities.

“Teams are increasingly working directly with programmatic partners — organizations that are deeply embedded in the communities we serve and closely aligned with our mission,” the note reads. “As we look ahead, this is a chance to build deeper, more durable relationships with those partners — and to reinforce the kind of legacy we want to leave behind.” -NYT” Tracing the Arabella network’s donors is tricky. But according to the NYT, the Gates Foundation has plowed $450 million into the network since 2008, which in turn funneled money into other nonprofit entities, ranging from radical leftist climate groups to abortion initiatives, and even supporting the permanent protest-industrial complex against President Trump.

https://twitter.com/seamusbruner/status/1933626755358863457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1933626755358863457%7Ctwgr%5E1e0fde66960c2c75df873fe2087d2cf266f22afb%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fgates-foundation-cuts-ties-arabella-advisors-linked-funding-radical-leftist-causes

With President Trump back in the White House and investigations focusing on corruption across the Democratic Party’s funding and nonprofit infrastructure, as well as ActBlue investigations, the risks for Bill Gates’ progressive NGO empire have never been greater. The move to cut ties could have happened even sooner, according to two people, one close to the foundation and one with knowledge of Arabella’s internal operations. Over the last few years, Arabella has become a target of conservative watchdogs because of its work with groups that funnel money toward progressive causes. With President Trump back in the White House, the political risks have only mounted. -NYT Peter Schweizer and Seamus Bruner of the Government Accountability Institute recently revealed a report that detailed how the rogue anti-Trump ‘No Kings’ front group, waging a permanent protest against all things Trump, “bagged $114.8 million from the Arabella dark money network.”

The Gates Foundation told NYT that the move to sever ties with Arabella was “a business decision that reflects our regular strategic assessments of partnerships and operating models.” NYT’s report on Arabella comes hours after NBC News confirmed Gates met with Trump at the White House on Tuesday afternoon. More details from the report: • Some nonprofits are distancing themselves from Arabella to keep Gates funding. • Several groups have started exiting Arabella’s New Venture Fund (NVF), which serves as a fiscal sponsor for 170+ projects and has funneled billions into progressive causes. • While Gates once accounted for a significant share of NVF funding, in 2023 its contribution was only 2%. Still, losing Gates threatens Arabella’s influence and revenue streams.

Read more …

Trump saves Europe.

Trump Mulls Travel Ban for EU Officials Over ‘Orwellian’ Censorship Law (ZH)

President Donald Trump is weighing a travel ban on European Union officials behind the bloc’s Digital Services Act (DSA), a sweeping online regulation that the White House claims is designed to censor Americans. According to sources familiar with the matter cited by Reuters, the State Department is considering visa restrictions targeting senior EU policymakers responsible for the legislation. A decision hasn’t been made, but discussions inside the administration intensified after a high-level meeting last week. The move would directly punish foreign officials for domestic policies Washington says undermine U.S. free speech rights. The EU’s DSA aims to compel tech giants to crack down on illegal content, but the Trump administration argues the policy amounts to government-driven censorship, accusing Brussels of forcing U.S. companies to muzzle American user under the guise of combating misinformation.

“We are monitoring increasing censorship in Europe with great concern but have no further information to provide at this time” a State Department spokesman told the Telegraph. An EU Commission spokesman fired back, rejecting the claims as “completely unfounded,” insisting that the DSA “sets out rules for online intermediaries to tackle illegal content, while safeguarding freedom of expression and information online.” Relations between the Trump administration and the EU have grown increasingly strained, fueled by threats of tariffs and disputes over tech regulation. Reports earlier this month revealed the U.S. government urged European diplomats to lobby against the DSA, intensifying a battle over who sets the rules for online speech.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has previously threatened visa bans for people who censor speech by Americans, including on social media, suggesting the policy could directly target foreign officials regulating U.S. tech companies. Vice President JD Vance has also repeatedly slammed European regulators, accusing them of “censoring” Americans. In a speech at the Munich Security Conference in February, he accused EU leaders of suppressing the speech of groups such as Germany’s Right-wing AfD party. Tensions aren’t limited to Brussels. The Trump administration has also targeted the UK’s Online Safety Act, calling it “Orwellian.” During Trump’s visit to Scotland last month, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer defended the legislation, insisting London remains committed to protecting free speech while tackling online harms.

The debate is expected to intensify next month when Nigel Farage testifies before Congress on threats to free expression in Britain. Farage is set to highlight the case of Lucy Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months over a social media post related to the Southport attacks, before being released earlier this month.


Lucy Connolly with her husband Ray. Mrs Connolly was jailed after a social media post Credit: Heathcliff O’Malley for the Telegraph

For now, no sanctions have been formally imposed. But if the administration follows through, it would represent a historic clash between Washington and Brussels over free speech, tech regulation, and sovereignty.

Read more …

“Of the 237,592 attempts made to illegally enter the UK since 2018, 85% involved men..”

“..of the attempts involving men, 83% involved men aged 18 or older..”

Reform’s Plan for Dealing with Illegal Migrants is a Good Start (Carl)

In a recent interview with the Times, Reform leader Nigel Farage unveiled his plan for dealing with Britain’s illegal migration crisis. It involves four key elements:
• Leaving the ECHR and suspending other relevant treaties
• Banning those who arrive through irregular channels from claiming asylum
• Moving illegal migrants from hotels and rented accommodation to disused RAF bases, and keeping them there
• Striking deals with migrants’ home countries, or failing that, deporting them to third countries or British overseas territories like Ascension Island

Predictably, the plan has been criticised by Farage’s political opponents. One Tory MP claimed that he “is just recycling many ideas the Conservatives have already announced”. Which would be easier to take seriously if the Tories hadn’t had 14 years in government to implement some of those ideas. Meanwhile, both Labour and the Liberal Democrats claimed that Farage’s plan won’t work. Labour called it “pie in the sky” and the Lib Dems insisted it “doesn’t offer any real solutions”. But what would a real solution look like? The current situation is manifestly preposterous: tens of thousands of migrants turning up uninvited on the South Coast, and then being housed in hotels and private accommodation at taxpayers’ expense – to the tune of billions of pounds per year. And crucially, the overwhelming majority of such migrants are adult men.

Of the 237,592 attempts made to illegally enter the UK since 2018, 85% involved men. (I’m excluding individuals for whom sex was not known or reported). This is arguably the single most important statistic in the entire debate. It is also worth noting that, of the attempts involving men, 83% involved men aged 18 or older (and the true figure is almost certainly higher because some migrants lie about their age). In other words, the people that British taxpayers are paying to house in hotels all across the country are not desperate women and children with nowhere else to go. They are overwhelmingly drawn from the least vulnerable demographic group. Even by the Left’s own self-professed values, this is an absurd policy. There are millions of people around the world that are far more needy than the people who turn up uninvited on the South Coast. And we could help them by providing food, medicine and other essentials in situ.

Does anyone really believe that covering hotel bills for adult men in Britain is the best way to help the world’s poor? Even the Economist, long a bastion of pro-migration sentiment, admits that Europe’s asylum system is not working and should be scrapped. As the magazine correctly notes, “it cannot cope with a world of proliferating conflict, cheap travel and huge wage disparities”. As far as I can see, neither Labour nor the Lib Dems has any plan that would prevent the continual inflow of illegal migrants into Britain. (Saying that you would “create safe and legal routes” is not a plan.) And the current situation is simply not sustainable: of course people don’t want large numbers of adult men being housed in their communities. The main weakness of Farage’s plan is the difficulty of striking deals with countries like Iran, which is among the biggest sources of illegal migrants.

Britain does little trade with Iran and already imposes sanctions on its government. In fact, sanctions relief might be the only way to make them take their citizens back. [ZH: We would be remiss if we did not note that none other than Elon Musk has been focused on the immigration crisis in the UK over the last 24 hours. He criticized Farage for not going far enough…

“I would like to help fund legal actions against corrupt officials who aided and abetted the rape of Britain, per the official government inquiry. ”

Musk also retweeted Tommy Robinson:
https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1960232418054476040?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1960232418054476040%7Ctwgr%5Ea96b04969d69f4a1d20858368f57c63cda23596a%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Freforms-plan-dealing-uk-illegal-migrants-good-start

And while British media was evidently silent about it, Musk made it very clear how he feels about the Scottish teenager..

Read more …

I thought multiculturalism was about some kind of melting pot. But there’s no melting going on here.

Multiculturalism Is Burning Down The German School System (RMX)

German schools are dealing with “hell.” That’s the conclusion reached by Die Welt newspaper, as cited by Hungarian outlet Mandiner. Based on numerous case studies, it is clear that “far too many children are being sent to school who can barely concentrate and, above all, who do not speak German.” Families, children, and teachers are suffering the consequences of the bad policies from politicians. In short, they “have failed.” One major issue is the death of the German language itself, across Germany. In the Hemshof district of Ludwigshafen, for example, barely a word of German is heard. The students in the district’s Gräfenau elementary school are 98 percent migrants.Welt indicates that plenty of Asian, African, and Slavic languages present, but as Germany has become a nation of migrants, the German language recedes.

“Italian, Greek, Turkish guest workers since the 1960s, and since 2015, the rest of the world,” Die Welt writes about the progression of immigration waves in the country. The school principal in the Hemshof district, Barbara Mächtle, has been vocal about the issues. For example, some 40 first-year students, a third of the year, may not be ready to enter the second grade. According to the newspaper, Mächtle “knows the tricks to cover this up, but he doesn’t use them.” For example, these children are enrolled in the second grade, but then “voluntarily drop out” on the first day of school. Machete refuses to play these games and will force these students to repeat the grade – “not to punish them, but to save them.” Mächtle also dispels the illusion that being surrounded by German, migrant kids will “absorb it on their own.” She says there is no “language immersion” because children “hear everything except German.”

“No child here is swimming in German waters, they remain in their Arab, Turkish, Afghan pools,” and “at best they develop a basic slang, a German of 50-100 words, which is enough for the street and the schoolyard, but not for a profession that can be understood even partially,” Welt reports. And then there is the violence inflicting schools, which the paper calls a widespread fire, not just here or there. In 2024, the authorities registered 35,570 school violence incidents, an average of 97 per day; 743 of these involved a knife. Students also express their religion, Islam, “aggressively” in the classroom. As Remix News has reported, 40 percent of all violent crime in the German school system is from foreigners. In addition, many of the German students have a foreign background.

This has created a situation where teachers are expected to be social workers first, taking immense time away from their actual work as teachers. With these students, the parents are not doing their jobs in preparing children to behave properly in the classroom. It is no wonder teachers are leaving the field, and many are discouraged from entering, which is yet another major issue: a massive teacher shortage. In Germany, it is no longer possible to provide the current student population with trained teachers. In the countryside, people are not applying for teaching jobs, and in the cities, teachers cannot afford to pay the rent, so many people apply for teaching positions immediately after graduating, only to quickly fail.

“In the past 20 years, fourth-grade maths assignments were often purely text-based. Today, books are full of pictures to make understanding possible at all,” bemoans Andreas Baudisch, the principal of the Humboldt primary school in Mannheim. “Basic operations are a great deal of work for many children. Many cannot formulate a complete sentence,” says the principal. There are some bright spots. Children from Indian families learn German better in four months than those born here because ‘they practice at home, they are interested in it,’ and this is something that is lacking in many other people who are second or third generation Germans living here.” Die Welt warns that no so long ago, these issues could only be found in troubled neighborhoods of Berlin, a situation that “horrified” people in the rest of the country. “That’s over, Berlin is everywhere,” the paper writes.

Read more …

“.. it’s tough to roll back entitlements when so many have gotten used to them..”

Merz: German Welfare State Is Running Out of Other People’s Money (Kruiser)

The biggest, boldest lie of every welfare state is that the goods and services it is providing to its citizens are “free.” Those of us with brain cells and an aversion to lying know that this is not only untrue, but also impossible. Politicians are fond of throwing taxpayer dollars around like drunk Kennedy cousins on summer break in Monte Carlo in order to make voters love them. nDespite being full-throated advocates for “sustainability” when it comes to almost anything else, socialist welfare state types are committed to an economic system that simply cannot go on forever. In the immortal words of the late, great Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples’ money.” How long it is before “eventually” happens is entirely based on the habits of prevaricating, spendthrift politicians, obviously.

As Americans are painfully aware, even capitalist countries are plagued by the socialist tendencies of many of their politicians. A bloated welfare state is obviously not any red-blooded capitalist’s ideal; that kind of bloat comes from politicians who still insist that socialism simply hasn’t been done correctly yet. Europe’s various welfare state countries are often pointed to as dream scenarios by American leftists. Never mind that the comparisons are absurd from the get-go, Democrats have never let glaring illogic slow them down. One prominent European leader is now offering a painful truth: his welfare state has gotten too pricey. This is from a Wall Street Journal Opinion piece titled “A Politician Speaks the Unspeakable”:

No, we don’t mean some racial or sexual crudity. Those obstacles in politics were breached long ago. We’re referring to something far more taboo in modern Western democracies: admitting that the size of the modern welfare state is no longer affordable. Friedrich Merz, the German Chancellor, said at a Christian Democratic Union conference on Saturday that “the welfare state that we have today can no longer be financed with what we produce in the economy.”

Thank you, Chancellor, for this burst of candor. Mr. Merz is doing what no one else in the top ranks of Western politics seems willing to do, which is broach the fundamental dilemma of the modern West. Nations have built welfare and entitlement states that are so large they have outstripped the ability of slow-growing economies to pay for them. Yet because the entitlement cushion is so broad and reaches deep into the middle class, it has become nearly impossible to reform. Merz is a center-right politician, so it’s not odd that he believes this; it’s just a surprise that he is saying it. As the article notes, it’s tough to roll back entitlements when so many have gotten used to them. Even broaching the subject can be rife with third rail dangers.

Once politicians have gotten the people hooked on the taxpayer-funded entitlement drug, party lines disappear, especially here in the United States. Americans don’t like to have things taken away from us, even if it’s done in keeping with political principles. That’s why we haven’t seen a lot of Republican politicians fighting for any kind of fiscal sanity in Congress. Once any kind of recurring spending is shoehorned into a budget, it’s practically locked in for life. Germany has long been an industrial powerhouse. Its economy ranks behind only the United States and China. This isn’t some boutique country like Sweden struggling with its “freebie” tab; it’s one of the major players. There is, of course, a lesson to be learned here for any country that has suffered with its leftists being in power for any length of time. The world is going to need a lot more curious and honest politicians for the lesson to sink in.

Read more …

“Instead of rational discourse, we get theatrical condemnation, all too willing to plunge the country into ever greater division.”

The Radical Left Is Still Trying to Get Trump Assassinated (Margolis)

The left spent years spewing dangerous rhetoric about President Donald Trump, calling him a threat to democracy. Leftists used this rhetoric to justify their lawfare strategy to keep him from being able to return to office, and it inspired at least two assassination attempts, one of which nearly succeeded. Despite universal calls to “cool the temperature,” Democrats had no such plans to do so. Their rhetoric hasn’t slowed; it has only escalated during Trump’s presidency. Now, even his straightforward effort to crack down on crime in Washington, D.C., has the left reverting to the same reckless, inciting language they’ve used all along. CNN’s coverage of Trump’s executive order to create specialized National Guard units saw verbal acrobatics drawing dangerous comparisons to Nazi Germany, the kind of rhetoric that inspires crazies to resort to violence. President Trump recently signed an executive order intended to create specialized National Guard units, with the goal of “dealing with public order issues.”

The announcement comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has authorized National Guard members currently deployed in Washington to carry weapons. The National Guard has already activated more than 1,900 troops from states including Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee for duty in the Capitol area. CNN’s Boris Sanchez turned to retired Army Maj. Gen. Randy Manner, a former Acting Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau, for analysis. And of course, it was completely unhinged. Reflecting on the implications of the newly minted specialized units, Manner laid out the historical context: “The average American has to know that this order for what we call quick reaction forces has been in existence for over 15 years. When I was the Acting Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau, we made sure to put that into the guidance for all the states to be able to pull people from existing units rapidly, to be able to assist the governor for any kind of situation that he or she may need.”

Yet the focus swiftly turned to the framing and language of the administration’s announcement, which Manner did not hesitate to criticize: “So the idea of creating specialized units, which by the way, it’s the language that matters, essentially, what the President is doing through the Secretary of Defense is creating units, official military units to quite frankly, guard or not guard, watch the American people. And that’s the thing that is absolutely abhorrent. It reminds me so much of what happened in Germany in the 1930s.” Such commentary is not just hyperbolic; it also risks stoking the same kind of hysteria that can drive unhinged actors to pursue violence. The invocation of Nazi Germany whenever Trump acts to restore order has become a favorite tool of the left, and its effect is corrosive. Instead of debating policy, these talking heads resort to historical analogies so loaded they border on incitement.

Anchor Brianna Keilar questioned the normalization of federal troops in American cities, asking if this is setting a dangerous precedent. Manner replied in kind, escalating his condemnation: “I believe fully that the President wants to put as a show of force to anybody who opposes him. He wants armed and uniformed military on the streets. If his true intent is all about law and order, then this should be what it is. It should be a law enforcement operation, not a military operation.” His outrage continued as he targeted Trump’s fiscal decisions: “He should restore the funds for community policing, for education, for the hiring of policemen and women in all of the jurisdictions, whether it’s the largest city or the smallest town. He stripped that out of the bills; that needs to be reinstated.”

I nearly spit out my coffee when I heard that. After years of the left calling for the defunding of the police, which, of course, caused a huge uptick in crime, suddenly they’re all for more funding for police? Get real. The fact is that Democrats have been on the side of criminals for years now, and any effort by Trump to fight crime would be decried as Nazi tactics. The rhetoric is unrelenting. By ceaselessly likening Trump’s use of the National Guard to the atrocities of Nazi Germany, leftists aren’t just rebuking his policies; they are purposefully undermining civility and fanning the flames of potential violence, including more assassination attempts against Trump. Instead of rational discourse, we get theatrical condemnation, all too willing to plunge the country into ever greater division.

Read more …

This is all about Trump wanting to set up a sovereign wealth fund, but I still think he simply wants to save Intel from going under. The US needs domestic chipmakers.

Intel Deal: Trump’s Industrial Policy Is Realism, Not Socialism (Daniel McCarthy)

Is it Comrade President now? Some conservatives are up in arms about President Donald Trump’s decision to have the government buy a stake in Intel. That’s state ownership of the means of production, isn’t it? Classic, textbook socialism. “If there is anyone who was a halfway prominent mainstream conservative … 10 years ago who now tells me they wouldn’t have screamed about incipient ‘socialism!’ or ‘fascism!’ about Trump’s Intel ‘investment,’” writes Jonah Goldberg on X, “I presumptively assume they are lying … .” In fact, a whole school of thought on the Right, going back decades, has championed industrial policies as bold as Trump’s, if not bolder. The public face of that school was Pat Buchanan, who was way ahead of the national debate on industrial policy—just as he was on immigration.

Trump is not a socialist, and America has a long history of government getting involved in owning companies—Amtrak is a familiar example. The for-profit but government-owned passenger-rail company was created under Republican President Richard Nixon. What Trump is doing with Intel is different from earlier precedents, however. Trump sees the Intel deal as a first step toward creating an American “sovereign wealth fund,” with many more investments to follow. The president isn’t looking to the past: This is about keeping America competitive with other nations in the 21st century, including communist China, which controls the world’s second- and third-largest sovereign wealth funds. A sovereign wealth fund is much like private investment funds, consisting of stocks, bonds, and other assets expected to appreciate in value.

Traditionally, countries rich in national resources, particularly oil, have used sovereign wealth funds to diversify and grow their economies. Instead of being at the mercy of oil prices, petroleum-rich nations such as Norway and Saudi Arabia channel some of their oil revenue into sovereign wealth funds, which then—much like, say, multibillion-dollar university endowments in America—can produce enormous returns. Norway pays for about 20% to 25% of its national budget with the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, the Government Pension Fund, which holds more than $1.7 trillion in assets. Is it a bad thing to pay for government with market profits, rather than by raising taxes on citizens or selling debt that eventually has to be repaid with interest?

A nation pays interest on its national debt but earns interest from a sovereign wealth fund. Mainstream conservatives more than 10 years ago were already behind a plan with many of the same advantages and disadvantages of a sovereign wealth fund; namely, “privatizing” Social Security. The idea was to let Americans put their compulsory Social Security payments into government-approved funds of their own choosing, which would generate higher returns from market investments than the Social Security Trust Fund could reap from investing exclusively in U.S. Treasury securities. Conservatives embraced that as a good free-market idea. Is a sovereign wealth fund any different? They both carry the same risks, above all what economists call “moral hazard.” The country got a taste of it in the Great Recession, when financial institutions that bankrupted themselves with bad investments were declared “too big to fail” and had to be bailed out by Washington and the Federal Reserve.

The government can’t allow Social Security to go bust, and if the retirement system’s money is invested in private funds, how many of those could Washington allow to fail, even if they made lousy investments? Trump is actually taking a double risk—most sovereign wealth funds only aim to maximize returns, producing revenue for the government. The president, however, also wants to conduct industrial policy with a sovereign wealth fund, by buying into strategically important but economically troubled companies like Intel. Yet the question isn’t just whether America can run a sovereign wealth fund right. It’s also what happens if we do nothing and rivals perfect the strategy. Beijing has the $1.3 trillion China Investment Corporation, Hong Kong’s $1 trillion SAFE Investment Company, as well as smaller funds with billions in assets.

During the Cold War, when America faced an international communist threat sponsored by Moscow, conservatives knew absolute devotion to free markets was self-defeating.William F. Buckley Jr., just coming into his own as a conservative leader in 1952, was staunchly committed to capitalism and small government. Nevertheless, he wrote: “Conservatives, and many Republicans, have got to think this problem through. And if they deem Soviet power a menace to our freedom (as I happen to), they will have to support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards and the attendant centralization of power in Washington … .”

Read more …

“Call me crazy — not control-the-weather crazy, or take-everyone’s-red-meat-away crazy, but still plenty crazy…”

It’s Official: Bill Gates Now Contains 2% Less Bond Villain (Green)

I’ve long suspected that, somewhere in his underground lair, Microsoft cofounder and villainous philanthropist Bill Gates has a tabletop laser-saw on the off chance that someday he needs to cut a British superspy in half. Because when you have the kind of money that Gates has, why not? You can even imagine Gates practicing his best Auric Goldfinger impression in his bathroom mirror while he shaves: “No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!” You wouldn’t imagine Gates doing a very good Goldfinger, of course, because his seeming villainy is matched only by his total dorkitude. $110 billion and schemes to control the world’s weather and food production can only get you so far. Taking all that into consideration, even a longtime opponent of Gates like Yours Truly must concede that the man who wants to dim the sun with nanoparticles is now 2% less Bond villain than before.

That’s because of who Gates just cut off from his charitable foundation’s metric crap-tons of money. And Another Thing: Gates really does want to experiment with dimming the sun to control the climate. I did, however, make up the part about using nanoparticles because that sounded much more sinister than dust. The philanthropic wing of Gates’s evil empire is the Gates Foundation, with an endowment worth around $77 billion. One of the Foundation’s major recipients of big-league largess is Arabella Advisors — a for-profit consulting firm that “advises left-leaning donors and nonprofits about where to give money and serves as the hub of a politically liberal ‘dark money’ network.” That quote was from Wikipedia, which I normally do not and would not rely on, but Arabella’s page seems to be pretty fair and balanced.

“According to The Atlantic, Arabella Advisors has “undeniably benefited from the rush of panicked political giving on the left during the Trump years.”[7] In 2020, the Sixteen Thirty Fund donated $410 million toward defeating Trump and winning Democratic control of the U.S. Senate.[8] Because of the way they are legally structured, Arabella Advisors and its affiliated groups are not required to disclose their donors, and they have not opted to do so”. Arabella makes their money the old-fashioned way: helping other people ruin the country. In secret. The Gates Foundation this week “quietly ceased backing a nonprofit network closely associated with the Democratic Party and criticized by conservatives,” New York Times reporter Theodore Schleifer revealed on Tuesday, calling it “a symbolically significant blow to a powerful player in liberal politics.”

In the same report, Schleifer revealed that “The Gates Foundation has disbursed or pledged about $450 million to nonprofit funds administered by Arabella over the last sixteen years.” Call me crazy — not control-the-weather crazy, or take-everyone’s-red-meat-away crazy, but still plenty crazy — but losing a benefactor to the tune of nearly half a billion dollars is a helluva lot more than “symbolically significant.” $450 million is significantly significant. And Another Thing: Gates really does want to take your steak away and force you to eat mushrooms instead. So when he tells you that “You can get used to the taste” of fungi masquerading as meat, tell that pompous Bond villain, “No, YOU can get used to the taste.”

Gates Foundation officials “made no mention of politics,” according to the NYT report, so I will. Coming so close on the heels of Elon Musk’s DOGE boys gutting billions worth of USAID slush funds for countless progressive NGOs, the Foundation’s move at least looks like an attempt to insulate itself from the Left’s increasingly toxic politics. Well, good. But until he stops trying to control the weather and gets his pasty fingers away from my ribeye, he’s still got 98% of his Bond villain status intact.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Hearing
https://twitter.com/Censored4sure/status/1960513403660685384

Net zero

Tarsier

Owl

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 272025
 
 August 27, 2025  Posted by at 9:45 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , ,  33 Responses »


René Magritte L’avenir (the future) 1936

 

Britain’s Newest Crisis: Too Many Patriotic Britons (Green)
WItkoff: We Hope To See Ukraine Conflict Resolved By The End Of 2025 (RT)
Zelensky Wants EU To Provide $1 Billion Monthly Allowance (Cradle)
West Discussing Sending 4-5 Brigades to Ensure Security in Ukraine (Sp.)
Zaluzhny Lauds Neo-Nazi Role Models (RT)
Trump Threatens Ukraine With Sanctions And Tariffs (RT)
Has Ukraine Just Declared War On Hungary? (Romanenko)
Bolton Attacks Trump For ‘Utterly Incoherent’ Ukraine Policy (ZH)
Can Trump Find a Way Out of the Box He Is in? (Paul Craig Roberts)
BBC Warns About RT’s Global Influence (RT)
Trump Vows To Punish Nations Imposing Digital Taxes (RT)
Trump Goes Knives-Out for Leftist Media (Salgado)
Kamala Screwed the Democrats So Badly I Can’t Stop Laughing (Green)
Are Democrats on the Verge of a Historic Midterm Wipeout? (Margolis)
Did NSA Director Mike Rogers Warn Donald Trump on November 17, 2016? (CTH)
Washington’s Nightmare: Modi and Xi Break The Ice (Bhadrakumar)
Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize Dreams Face Resistance (Cradle)
Burkina Faso Suspends Health Project Funded By Bill Gates (RT)

 

 

https://twitter.com/SaltyGoat17/status/1960504651876286716

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1960082737848782924

1 trillion
https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1960402526114627812

Tulsi
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1960397959717175428

Enten

 

 

 

 

“Britons who still love their country and want to turn it around. Can you imagine the nerve?”

Britain’s Newest Crisis: Too Many Patriotic Britons (Green)

On top of growing Islamification and accompanying antisemitism, decaying national defense, poverty-inducing “net zero” policies, the ruination of Doctor Who, and a whole host of other issues, Britain has yet another crisis that the government just can’t seem to get a handle on. Britons who still love their country and want to turn it around. Can you imagine the nerve? You might have already seen in the last week or two, Britons defiantly flying the U.K. Union Jack or England’s St. George’s Cross — only to have officials who seem to have no problem with displays of Palestinian or Pakistani pride take them down. In fact, those displays sometimes come with a government seal of approval. This one is from the Birmingham City Council:

The country’s Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office got in on the action, too, wishing a “very happy Independence Day to Pakistanis in the UK, in Pakistan and around the world.” The post on X included little emojis of the Pakistani and British flags, and can you guess without clicking through which one came first? Flag order makes a statement..

https://twitter.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/1959388210288640101?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1959388210288640101%7Ctwgr%5E226debe250fe769813f3c4a532edab7ceb6e0ee7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvodkapundit%2F2025%2F08%2F25%2Fbritains-war-on-britain-n4943012

…and so does pulling them down. And Another Thing: The world was a better place when Britain imposed British notions of justice on Third World nations instead of importing Third World notions into Britain. Discuss. According to the city’s Wikipedia page, Birmingham, as of 2021, was 30% Islamic and 34% Christian, which might explain this BBC report on Friday:

“Some residents have found the sudden appearance of St George’s and union flags ‘intimidating”, a council has said. While many people were flying the flag to cheer on the Lionesses during the 2025 Euros, thousands more have appeared in towns and cities in England during August – many attached to lampposts. Leader of Dorset Council, Liberal Democrat Councillor Nick Ireland, described the movement as an “explosion of patriotism”, but also said it was “naive” to suggest the emblems had not been “hijacked” by some far-right groups.”

Want to take an ordinary, patriotic Briton and convince him he’s a fascist? That’s how you do it. Want to convince the local Muslim population that they can bully Britons into giving up flying their own flags in their own country? Same trick. Some Britons have had enough, and are raising — or making — flags wherever they’re able.

https://twitter.com/TPointUK/status/1957348946465956049?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1957348946465956049%7Ctwgr%5E226debe250fe769813f3c4a532edab7ceb6e0ee7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpjmedia.com%2Fvodkapundit%2F2025%2F08%2F25%2Fbritains-war-on-britain-n4943012

Then there are purely practical efforts like this one:

Sorry, did I say “purely practical?” I meant to say, “half-practical, half-cheeky.” The deadly epidemic of [checks notes] waving the flag comes hard on the heels of protests at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex — where “migrants” were housed at taxpayer expense, and not without some inconvenience. First, there was the migrant “charged with three sexual offences, harassment and inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity.” And then this: “Mohammed Sharwarq, 32, a Syrian national living in the same hotel, has been charged with sexual assault, two counts of common assault, and four counts of assault by beating.

A BBC report states that these offences are alleged to have occurred inside The Bell Hotel. Mr Sharwarq denied the claim of sexual assault, but admitted the non-sexual offences at a court hearing, according to a Sky News report.”The High Court put at least a temporary halt to the hotel’s use as a migrant shelter. Scenes like these are distressingly common in the postmodern United Kingdom — a country that could use a few more flag-waving patriots, and far fewer “migrants” acting like occupiers of a conquered nation.

Read more …

“..the Russian side has at least “put a peace proposal on the table.”

WItkoff: We Hope To See Ukraine Conflict Resolved By The End Of 2025 (RT)

US special presidential envoy Steve Witkoff has said Washington hopes to see the Ukraine conflict resolved by the end of 2025, citing Moscow’s “peace proposal on the table” and ongoing meetings with Russian and Ukrainian representatives. Speaking at a cabinet meeting with President Donald Trump on Tuesday, Witkoff said he will be “having meetings all this week” on Ukraine and other global conflicts, “and we hope to settle them before the end of this year.” In a follow-up interview with Fox News, Witkoff said that although Trump had expressed frustration with both Moscow and Kiev, the Russian side has at least “put a peace proposal on the table.”

He acknowledged that territorial concessions “may not be something that the Ukrainians can take,” but argued that the Trump administration had brought the sides closer to agreement than ever before. “There’s a peace proposal on the table,” Witkoff reiterated. “We’re at this place where we think the end is in sight… we have technical teams working on it and we’re hopeful that by the end of this year, and maybe quite a bit sooner, we actually can find the ingredients to get to that peace deal.” According to Witkoff, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed a clear desire to end the conflict and discussed Moscow’s position in depth with Trump during their historic Alaska summit earlier this month.

While no details of any potential deal were made public, Moscow has long insisted that a sustainable settlement can only be achieved if Kiev agrees never to join NATO, undergoes demilitarization and denazification, and recognizes the new reality on the ground. This includes the status of Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson, and Zaporozhye as part of Russia – territories that voted to join the country in referendums in 2014 and 2022. Witkoff emphasized that any decision on territorial concessions would be for Ukraine to make, and suggested the issue would be tied to long-term security guarantees. He noted that he would meet Ukrainian officials in New York this week and stressed that Washington maintains daily communication with Moscow.

Recent reports have indicated that ongoing discussions include Kiev potentially ceding its remaining positions in Donbass in exchange for yet-to-be-defined Western commitments. Witkoff further claimed “we may end up seeing a bilateral meeting” between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, adding that Trump might be “needed at the table to finish a deal.” Putin has not ruled out meeting Zelensky, but insisted a meeting could only follow tangible progress in negotiations. Moscow has also questioned Zelensky’s legitimacy, citing his expired presidential term and warning that any deals he signs could be overturned by his successor.

Read more …

He’ll get it.

Zelensky Wants EU To Provide $1 Billion Monthly Allowance (Cradle)

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky stated on 25 August that Kiev plans to secure at least $1 billion monthly from European nations to purchase US weapons to continue his war against Russia. Zelensky made the comment while speaking alongside Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store during a press conference in Kiev on Monday. US President Donald Trump is seeking to move away from providing weapons directly to Kiev. He instead wants European nations to purchase US weapons for the Ukrainian military to continue the war.The Ukrainian president also said Norway could contribute to security guarantees for Ukraine with an emphasis on providing air defense and maritime security.

On 24 August, US Vice President JD Vance claimed Russia has been “flexible” and made “significant concessions” in some core demands as part of negotiations to end the war, including regarding US and European security guarantees. “They’ve recognized that they’re not going to be able to install a puppet regime in Kiev. That was, of course, a major demand at the beginning. And importantly, they’ve acknowledged that there is going to be some security guarantee to the territorial integrity of Ukraine,” Vance stated while speaking on NBC News’ Meet the Press talk show on Sunday. Last week, Axios reported that senior officials from the US, Ukraine, and several European countries were discussing a proposal for security guarantees for Ukraine, likely involving US air power.

In an interview with Fox News, President Trump stressed no US troops would be sent to Ukraine, but that he was open to providing air support to European ground forces should they be deployed to the country.Trump also said he thought Russian President Vladimir Putin would be willing to accept such US and European security guarantees for Ukraine. However, the Russian Foreign Ministry has said it “categorically” rejects the possibility of “a military contingent with the participation of NATO countries” inside Ukraine.

Read more …

Russsia can say 1,000 times they won’t accept NATO troops next door, makes no difference. What happens when Russia fires the first rounds at them? Article 5?

West Discussing Sending 4-5 Brigades to Ensure Security in Ukraine (Sp.)

Western states are discussing a possibility of sending 4-5 brigades by the group of countries supporting Ukraine – the so-called “coalition of the willing” – to ensure security in Ukraine along with “strategic enablers” from the US, the Financial Times newspaper reported, citing Head of the Office of the Ukrainian president Andriy Yermak. On August 18, US President Donald Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders for talks at the White House. During the meeting, Trump said he would not compare the security guarantees that Kiev could receive with those existing in NATO. “Discussions revolved around 4 to 5 European brigades on the ground, provided by the coalition of the willing, plus ‘strategic enablers’ from the US,” The Financial Times quoted Zelensky’s chief of staff as saying.

Yermak said that the meeting in Washington provided clarity on issues related to security guarantees and the acquisition of US-made weapons through European financial instruments. The support of the “coalition of the willing” will comprise a combination of military, political, and economic measures, he added. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said that the presence of NATO states’ troops on Ukrainian territory, under any flag and in any capacity, including as peacekeepers, is a threat to Russia, and that Moscow will not accept it under any circumstances.

Read more …

Ukraine’s former top military commander. De-nazififation is easier said than done.

Zaluzhny Lauds Neo-Nazi Role Models (RT)

Retired Ukrainian General Valery Zaluzhny, widely seen as a potential successor to Vladimir Zelensky, has called for education programs that highlight members of the neo-Nazi Azov military unit as role models. As Ukraine’s former top military commander and now ambassador to the UK, Zaluzhny is considered one of the country’s most popular public figures. Polls suggest he would likely defeat Zelensky if presidential elections were held, and Western governments are reportedly courting him as a possible future leader. In an interview published on Saturday Zaluzhny praised the Soviet Union’s approach to memorializing historic figures and suggested Ukraine adopt a similar model using fighters with the controversial regiment – which is accused of war crimes and recognized as a bastion of militarized neo-Nazism – as examples of proper behavior.

“It’s very important for the military-patriotic education to know who did what and what came out of it,” Zaluzhny said. “Soviet propaganda did it right. I once argued with NATO specialists, telling them we, members of the military who grew up in this territory, put great importance into [historic connections].”Ukraine, he added, should “set a goal of what it wants from its children in 10 years,” arguing that promoting Azov’s “heroism” would be beneficial.Formed from members of radical Ukrainian nationalist groups, Azov was integrated into the National Guard in 2014 and since then has grown more influential and powerful. Before the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022, even Western observers described the unit as a hotbed of extremism and neo-Nazism that attracted white supremacist sympathizers across Europe.

In 2018, the US Congress barred funding for Azov over human rights concerns, but the restriction was lifted in 2024 after the group rebranded and claimed to have abandoned its neo-Nazi roots. Russia designates Azov a terrorist organization and has accused its members of committing atrocities during hostilities. Moscow has identified “de-Nazification” – reducing the influence of radical nationalist ideology in Ukrainian politics – as one of its key goals in the conflict.As of March, Russia’s Investigative Committee reported successful prosecutions against 145 members of Azov on charges including breach of rules of war, mistreatment of prisoners of war and civilians, and murder.

Read more …

“I’m sure that Ukraine thought they were going to win. It’s going to be, you know, we’re going to win. You’re going to beat somebody that’s 15 times your size.”

Trump Threatens Ukraine With Sanctions And Tariffs (RT)

Washington could impose sanctions and tariffs on both Russia and Ukraine if the two adversaries fail to make progress in settling hostilities, US President Donald Trump has said. Speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday, Trump said that it “takes two to tango,” and suggested that Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky “was not exactly innocent.” “Thousands of young people, mostly young people, are dying every single week. If I can save that, by doing sanctions or by just being me, or by using a very strong tariff system that’s very costly to Russia or Ukraine or whoever we have,” Trump stated. He also reiterated his readiness to slap new restrictions on Moscow.

“We want to have an end. We have economic sanctions. I’m talking about economic because we’re not going to get into a world war,” he said. Trump criticized his predecessor, Joe Biden, calling him “grossly incompetent” for allowing the Russia-Ukraine conflict to happen in the first place. “Nobody goes into a war thinking they’re going to lose. They go in – I’m sure that Ukraine thought they were going to win. It’s going to be, you know, we’re going to win. You’re going to beat somebody that’s 15 times your size. Biden shouldn’t have let that happen,” Trump stated.

The US president also appeared to dismiss Moscow’s concerns about the Zelensky’s legitimacy. “Doesn’t matter what they say. Everybody’s posturing. It’s all bullsh*t, ok? Everybody’s posturing,” Trump told reporters.Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated Moscow’s stance in an interview with NBC aired on Sunday, calling Zelensky the “de facto head of the regime,” and stressed the person signing any peace deal must have legal authority to do so.

Read more …

“Zelensky openly threatened Hungary. He admitted that they hit the Druzhba pipeline because we don’t support their EU membership. This proves again that Hungarians made the right decision.”

Has Ukraine Just Declared War On Hungary? (Romanenko)

In the swirl of the Ukraine war, headlines rarely fail to shock. Yet the latest spat between Kiev and Budapest raises a question that would have been unthinkable two years ago: has Ukraine effectively opened a second front – albeit hybrid, rhetorical, and economic – against an EU state? The immediate spark was the Druzhba (“Friendship”) oil pipeline that still delivers crude from Russia to Central Europe. Several Ukrainian drone strikes targeted the pipeline in recent weeks, halting supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. A Ukrainian commander, known by the call sign Madyar, publicly admitted involvement. For Hungary and Slovakia, this was more than an economic disruption. Both countries rely heavily on the pipeline, and in response, their leaders called on the European Commission to guarantee supply security.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, a frequent critic of EU policy on Ukraine, accused Brussels of serving Kiev’s interests over those of member states. His frustration boiled over further when he described Vladimir Zelensky’s quips about “friendship” as thinly veiled threats. Zelensky’s remark – “We have always supported friendship between Ukraine and Hungary, and now the existence of this ‘Friendship’ depends on Hungary” – was apparently meant as a pun on the pipeline’s name, but to Hungary it sounded like a mafia-style threat. Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s reaction was uncompromising: “Zelensky openly threatened Hungary. He admitted that they hit the Druzhba pipeline because we don’t support their EU membership. This proves again that Hungarians made the right decision.”

The timing is telling. Strikes on the pipeline coincided with Zelensky’s Washington visit alongside EU leaders. Either Brussels tacitly encouraged him to punish Orban, an ally of Donald Trump, or the EU simply looked away as Zelensky acted on his own. Both explanations sound outrageous, but there hardly seems to be a third option. What is clear is that Kiev, facing immense pressure on its eastern front, is choosing a dangerous rhetorical battle with Budapest. Hungary has made abundantly clear its discomfort with the EU’s unquestioning support for Ukraine. Since the Russian military operation began in 2022, Budapest has resisted sanctions on Russian energy, insisted on continuing imports through the Druzhba pipeline, and refused to send weapons to Kiev. Orban has shown himself to be a pragmatic outlier: defending Hungarian interests, pursuing cheap Russian energy, and maintaining cordial ties with Moscow.

For this, Hungary has faced isolation within the EU. While Poland, the Baltics, and most of Western Europe rallied behind Ukraine with military and financial aid, Budapest has been resisting this consensus. Orban’s government was derided as Putin’s Trojan horse in Europe. Yet for Hungarians, this positioning has had a rationale: keep the economy stable, avoid direct confrontation, and retain flexibility in a deeply uncertain geopolitical landscape. Lost in the heated rhetoric is the fact that Hungary has also quietly carried a humanitarian burden. In 2022 alone, over 1.3 million Ukrainians crossed into Hungary – second only to Poland and Romania. Budapest accepted them with little fanfare, though later tightened its asylum rules to restrict new arrivals to those from active war zones. At the same time, Hungary supplies a significant share of Ukraine’s electricity, a fact Szijjarto reminded Kiev of when rebuffing Ukrainian accusations.

To respond with accusations and pipeline attacks against such a neighbor seems, at minimum, ungrateful. At worst, it risks alienating one of the few EU members that has provided crucial – if unheralded – humanitarian support in a time of war. The broader context is sobering. On the battlefield, Ukraine faces mounting setbacks in the Donbass and along the eastern front. Against that backdrop, Zelensky’s rhetoric toward Hungary appears almost surreal – boastful, as if victory against Russia were imminent. The contrast between battlefield realities and diplomatic bravado risks undermining Kiev’s credibility. In any sane timeline, here is where Brussels should stop and think again about continuing its support for Kiev.

Should the EU stand behind Zelensky even when his actions harm member states, or acknowledge that Orbán – despite his many disagreements with Brussels – has a point? Recent history shows that we are not in a sane timeline, though. Open threats, pipeline sabotage (remember Nord Stream?), and insults from Ukrainian officials don’t seem to register with Brussels officials at all. Kiev’s behavior towards Budapest may not amount to a declaration of war, but it is undeniable that Ukraine has chosen to ramp up its confrontation with Hungary. If the EU wants to sell its support for Kiev as “unity” – a word often used and abused by the likes of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen – then letting Zelensky get away with this is a bizarre choice.

Read more …

“..Bolton “could be a very unpatriotic guy. We’re going to find out.”

Bolton Attacks Trump For ‘Utterly Incoherent’ Ukraine Policy (ZH)

Former national security adviser John Bolton has gone after President Trump, blasting his Ukraine strategy as “incoherent” in an opinion piece published Monday, just a few days after federal agents raided his Maryland home and D.C. office over the handling of classified documents. “President Donald Trump’s Ukraine policy is no more coherent today than it was last Friday when his administration executed search warrants against my home and office,” Bolton said in Washington Examiner. Bolton’s op-ed title went all-in: “Trump’s utterly incoherent Ukraine strategy.” He wrote that “Collapsing in confusion, haste, and the absence of any discernible meeting of the minds among Ukraine, Russia, several European countries, and America, Trump’s negotiations may be in their last throes, along with his Nobel Peace Prize campaign.”

Hoped-for momentum towards an eventual trilateral Putin-Zelensky-Trump summit has indeed been stalled, and Trump said late last week that we could make a major decision if peace isn’t negotiated in two weeks – which likely means more biting sanctions on Russia and its trading partners. Neither warring side has actually backed off from its position, and Russia has little reason to soften its demands given that it maintains the clear upper-hand on the battlefield. Still, Bolton – as one of the neocon madmen behind the push to invade and overthrow Iraq (and other countries) – is not one to talk about coherent foreign policy.

“The administration has tried to camouflage its disarray behind social media posts, such as Trump comparing his finger-pointing at Russian President Vladimir Putin to then-Vice President Richard Nixon during the famous kitchen debate with Nikita Khrushchev,” Bolton said further in his piece. “Why Trump wants to be compared to the only president who resigned in disgrace is unclear.” So clearly, Bolton is not backing down or being quiet despite the FBI raid on his home last Friday, which was described as a “court-authorized law enforcement activity.” The ‘war’ in the op-ed pages has been unleashed, as on Tuesday White House trade adviser Peter Navarro took to The Hill and charged Bolton with “profiteering off of America’s secrets” in relation to his 2020 book, “The Room Where It Happened.”

Navarro’s op-ed said “He was trafficking in Oval Office conversations and national security intelligence that should have stayed secret – either by law or under executive privilege.” “That isn’t service. That isn’t patriotism. That’s profiteering off of America’s secrets,” Navarro wrote, citing a federal judge who at the time said “seems to be out of the barn” – when Trump officials had tried to stop its publication. Back in 2020, Navarro had slammed the memoir as like “revenge porn”. Bolton has only issued rare praise of Trump when he bombs another country (as he did Iran this summer)… As for the raid on Bolton’s house, Trump has said that he didn’t personally order it or know about it before-hand, amid accusations that it is politically motivated retribution. The president has, however, said that Bolton “could be a very unpatriotic guy. We’re going to find out.”

Read more …

“Putin’s side of the bargain would be to let Trump grandstand in presiding over the peace agreement that ends the war.”

Can Trump Find a Way Out of the Box He Is in? (Paul Craig Roberts)

Yesterday on his program Dialogue Works Nima had two guests, Larry Johnson, formerly of the CIA, and me. I come in at about the one hour mark at the close of the program with Larry. I recommend that you take advantage of the double feature. https://www.youtube.com/live/Tw0wfYs-kOQ Nima and I discuss the severe constraints on President Trump that handicap him in his effort to bring about not only a settlement in Ukraine but also impede a wider settlement with Russia that would put the world at peace.

Larry Johnson and I agree that the easiest way for Trump to conclude the conflict in Ukraine is to stop supplying, weapons, money, and diplomatic support. But to do this requires Trump to jettison the US military/security complex along with its budget and power which are dependent on having Russia as an enemy. Presidents such as John Kennedy, Richard Nixon, and Ronald Reagan who had in mind winding down the Cold War ran into problems with the military/security complex. The military/security complex has military bases or armaments manufacturers in nearly every state. The number of governors, House and Senate members, and businesses dependent on orders from military bases and weapon manufacturers is vast. The combination of taxes, employment, campaign contributions, and supply relationships is too large of a force for Trump to jettison.

Another constraint on Trump is the American doctrine of hegemony which is at odds with peace-making. The US foreign policy doctrine requires that the US take an aggressive approach to countries that could constrain US unilateralism. In other words, the pursuit of hegemony makes a country a poor peace-maker. Trump has not repudiated the hegemony doctrine. Instead he exercises it with his numerous threats to other governments. As I have consistently reported, the conflict in Ukraine is a symptom and not a cause of what Putin refers to as the root cause of the conflict. The root cause is the absence of a mutual security agreement between Russia and the West. NATO with missile bases on Russia’s border creates insecurity for Russia. This insecurity is the root cause. Both the material interest of the US military/security complex and the hegemony doctrine are obstacles to removing the insecurity.

As the Russian position remains the same and Zelensky remains uncooperative, perhaps Trump sees Putin getting off his butt and quickly winning the war as the escape route from the box in which Trump finds himself. Perhaps Trump signaled to Putin, as he did to Netanyahu, to get it over with as its continuation is too embarrassing to Trump. Putin’s side of the bargain would be to let Trump grandstand in presiding over the peace agreement that ends the war. The wider and serious problem is Russia’s sense of insecurity with NATO/US missile bases on her border. To remove the real problem of nuclear conflict, the US needs to move away from Russia’s borders and honor the agreement the George H. W. Bush administration made with Gorbachev that NATO would stay distant from Russia’s border.

Read more …

“Russia is like water: where there are cracks in the cement, it trickles in…”

BBC Warns About RT’s Global Influence (RT)

Russian media organizations are expanding their reach internationally as Western networks scale back operations due to financial constraints, the BBC reported Monday. RT and Sputnik, which remain banned across much of the West following accusations that they had spread “misinformation” – have been growing their presence in other regions. RT launched a Serbian-language service in late 2024, while Sputnik Africa has recently launched radio broadcasting in Ethiopia. The UK broadcaster said this “coincides with an apparent weakening from the Western media” driven by budget cuts and shifting foreign policy priorities. In Lebanon, it lamented, Sputnik has moved into airwaves previously occupied by BBC Arabic. The report also pointed to staff reductions at US-funded Voice of America under President Donald Trump, part of a broader push to curb what his administration sees as inefficient government spending.

The policy shift had global repercussions. In Ukraine, as many as 90% of media outlets have faced financial strain since foreign grant money became scarce. Media experts interviewed by the BBC argued that Russian outlets have capitalized on the West’s retreat. “Russia is like water: where there are cracks in the cement, it trickles in,” said Kathryn Stoner, a Stanford University political scientist. Stoner and other scholars published a book last year titled ‘Russia, Disinformation, and the Liberal Order,’ which characterized RT as a “threat to democracy.” Founded in 2005, RT was designed to project Russian perspectives to international audiences. Part of its strategy has been to challenge entrenched Western narratives and present viewpoints excluded from other global broadcasters.

Read more …

Big Tech=US companies.

Trump Vows To Punish Nations Imposing Digital Taxes (RT)

US President Donald Trump on Monday threatened “substantial” new tariffs and curbs on semiconductor exports against countries that maintain digital taxes and regulations he says “discriminate” against American tech firms. Digital services taxes (DSTs), now in place in dozens of countries, are designed to capture revenue from the biggest global tech firms. Trump has long argued the levies unfairly target American companies – notably Meta, Alphabet and Amazon – and has pressed US trade partners to abandon them. In a post on his Truth Social platform on Monday, Trump blasted “Digital Taxes, Legislation, Rules, or Regulations,” warning he could impose additional tariffs and tighten export controls on US technologies, stressing that America and its firms would no longer serve as the “piggy bank” or “doormat” of the world.

”As the President of the United States, I will stand up to Countries that attack our incredible American Tech Companies. Digital Taxes, Digital Services Legislation, and Digital Markets Regulations are all designed to harm, or discriminate against, American Technology,” Trump wrote. He complained that such measures “give a complete pass to China’s largest Tech Companies” and declared “this must end, and end now.” The salvo risks reigniting trade tensions with the UK and EU, despite both having recently struck agreements with Washington. US officials have repeatedly criticized Britain’s digital services tax, which remained in place after its deal with the Trump administration, and have also taken aim at the EU’s landmark Digital Services Act requiring tech firms to more aggressively police their platforms.

Several EU states, including France, Italy and Spain, maintain digital services taxes of their own. Digital services taxes have already emerged as a flashpoint in Trump’s trade agenda. In June, he threatened to halt all talks with Canada. Ottawa backed down just before the measure was due to take effect, prompting the White House to boast that Canada had “caved” to US pressure. Countries that impose digital services taxes argue the charges are justified because tech giants such as Amazon reap huge profits from their citizens while paying little or no tax to local budgets.

Read more …

“No one watching CNN or CBS could think they were free and objective.”

Trump Goes Knives-Out for Leftist Media (Salgado)

President Donald Trump famously dubbed radical leftist media “fake news,” and now he’s weighing how to deal yet another decisive blow to that fake news. Now that the Trump administration is in control of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Trump is apparently considering urging his hardcore FCC chairman, Brendan Carr, to investigate revoking licenses for mainstream media outlets that are little more than arms of the Democrat Party. The days of leftist media dominance are over. Late on Sunday, Trump posted on Truth Social, “Despite a very high popularity and, according to many, among the greatest 8 months in Presidential History, ABC & NBC FAKE NEWS, two of the worst and most biased networks in history, give me 97% BAD STORIES.” It is unclear exactly which study or dataset Trump was referencing here, although a study from Media Research Center earlier this year found that coverage of the Trump administration on ABC, NBC, and CBS was 92% negative.

But most Americans do not need a study to tell them that leftist media is incredibly biased against Trump and anything he does, which is how they can turn anything, including major victories, into an excuse to bash Trump. Just witness the extreme media hysteria over his federalization of law enforcement to clean up Washington, D.C, which so far has been very successful at bringing down crime in our nation’s capital. Trump Derangement Syndrome is rampant in our mainstream media. After mentioning the nearly 100% negative coverage of himself and his administration, Trump continued, “IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEY ARE SIMPLY AN ARM OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND SHOULD, ACCORDING TO MANY, HAVE THEIR LICENSES REVOKED BY THE FCC. I would be totally in favor of that because they are so biased and untruthful, an actual threat to our Democracy!!! MAGA.”

Trump followed that up with another post about the potential action against excessively biased mainstream media: “Why is it that ABC and NBC FAKE NEWS, two of the absolute worst and most biased networks anywhere in the World, aren’t paying Millions of Dollars a year in LICENSE FEES,” he asked. Then Trump made his daring statement again: “They should lose their Licenses for their unfair coverage of Republicans and/or Conservatives, but at a minimum, they should pay up BIG for having the privilege of using the most valuable airwaves anywhere at anytime!!! Crooked ‘journalism’ should not be rewarded, it should be terminated!!!” Freedom of the press is a core constitutional right, but the problem is that a significant amount of our press is not free. So many outlets now receive favors from politicians in exchange for positive coverage, regardless of reality. No one watching CNN or CBS could think they were free and objective.

Read more …

“Kamala’s team “believes she’s done her part,” by blowing $1.5 billion on a losing presidential race and leaving her party millions in debt.”

Kamala Screwed the Democrats So Badly I Can’t Stop Laughing (Green)

Forget the old-school thrills of “F1,” the family charm of “Freakier Friday,” and even the surprisingly pro-life “Fantastic Four: First Steps” — because this summer’s feel-good movie turns out to be an August sleeper hit that virtually nobody saw coming. It’s the story of a failed presidential candidate who raised record sums, left record debt, lost anyway, and gave her party the finger when it needed her most. It’s called “Kamala’s Revenge,” and it’s the kind of razor-sharp political comedy that Hollywood hasn’t dared make since 1997’s “Wag the Dog.” The premise of “Kamala’s Revenge” is even wilder than Chauncey Gardiner in “Being There” from 1979. If you need a refresher, Peter Sellers plays a simpleton named Chance who was raised in total isolation by a wealthy man in D.C.

When the old man dies and Chance is forced out on the street — wearing the old man’s very nice suit — “Chance the gardener” is mistaken for “Chauncey Gardiner,” and is soon dispensing advice to Washington’s rich and powerful. It’s an all-time favorite movie, but it has nothing on “Kamala’s Revenge.” The premise of “Kamala’s Revenge” is that the vice president is a totally inept (not to mention comically inapt) DEI hire who, when the senescent president is forced out of his reelection campaign by his own party’s elders, finds herself with just 107 days to scrape together a presidential campaign. I know this sounds too crazy for fiction, but bear with me — it gets crazier. Despite running the shortest presidential campaign in history, Kamala (with a big assist from the media and various celebrities) raises a record $1.5 billion, but blows through it all and then some.

She goes down in major defeat, but according to this political news site in the movie — it’s called Axios or something — months later, her party had to pony up “more than $15 million toward paying off [her] campaign expenses.” Crazy, right? But “Kamala’s Revenge” has only begun mining its comedy gold. Thanks to Kamala’s debts and some massive fundraising by the other side, Axios says that her party doesn’t even have $20 million in the bank, but the other party — headed up by the bad guy she lost to — is sitting on a massive $80 million war chest. So the bad guys run attack ads, boost their social media presence — all the smart political stuff Kamala’s party used to dominate. Instead, they’re just flailing around, talking about stolen lands, letting illegal immigrant wife-beaters out of jail, sticking male sex offenders in girls’ bathrooms, and all this other crazy stuff you’d never believe.

But it gets wilder. “Some donors,” Axios says, “have grown reluctant” to give Kamala’s party more money even as they try to “pivot to the 2026 midterms.” They’re searching the sofa cushions for cash at this point. They’re so desperate that the party elders go back to Kamala for help. She agrees to let the party use “her email list to help raise money and has held a few small fundraising events. But the total money raised from the events has been disappointing.” Disappointing to them, of course, but audiences can’t stop laughing. The kicker though is in one of the final scenes. When the email list fails to accomplish much, party organizers go to Kamala and beg her to personally host the kind of big fundraisers she pulled off during her campaign… but she tells them no. Kamala’s team “believes she’s done her part,” by blowing $1.5 billion on a losing presidential race and leaving her party millions in debt. If Hollywood ever makes a sequel to “Kamala’s Revenge,” maybe the big twist is that she turns out to have been the other party’s mole all along. Otherwise? Just another simpleton in a nice suit.

Read more …

“I couldn’t find a point at which Republicans were doing better at this point in the cycle. It’s at least this century. It probably goes way back in the last century.”

Are Democrats on the Verge of a Historic Midterm Wipeout? (Margolis)

I’ve previously reported that Democrats have a money problem. In addition to a lack of donations coming in, the Democratic National Committee is paying down Kamala Harris’s campaign debt. However, these are not the only issues threatening their 2026 midterm prospects. Money is certainly important, but perhaps even more so are voters. But according to CNN’s Harry Enten, the voters aren’t exactly there for the Democrats, either. Enten delivered a devastating assessment of the 2026 electoral landscape for the Democrats, noting that Republicans are seeing unprecedented gains in voter registration across critical battleground states. “Four swing states that, in fact, do keep track of registration by party,” Enten noted. He revealed that the GOP hasn’t been this well-positioned at this stage of the cycle in two decades.

“Look, the Republican Party is in their best position at this point in the cycle since at least 2005 in all four of these key battleground states.” Enten began his analysis in the Southwest. “Arizona. How about Nevada? Republicans haven’t done this well since 2005 — oh my goodness gracious — at this, at this point in the cycle.” As he moved eastward, the numbers just kept getting better for the GOP. “North Carolina: I couldn’t find a point at which Republicans were doing better at this point in the cycle. It’s at least this century. It probably goes way back in the last century.” There was more: “And Pennsylvania, very similar: Republicans doing better at this point than at any point, at any point this century, at least as far as I could find.”

https://twitter.com/OpenSourceZone/status/1960138861368979521

Enten then broke down the size of the GOP’s registration surge by comparing it to the first Trump administration in 2017. “Look at this. The Republican Party gains in party registration compared to this point back in 2017, during the Trump first administration,” he enthused. He highlighted that in Arizona, the GOP has gained three points in party registration compared to 2017. In Nevada, it’s six points; in North Carolina, eight points, and finally, in Pennsylvania, GOP registration is eight full points above this point in Trump’s first administration. Enten’s analysis underscores just how dramatic the GOP’s organizational and registration push has been heading into 2026.

For Democrats, the numbers paint a dire picture: Republicans are not only expanding their base in traditional swing states but are doing so at levels unseen in decades — generations, even. The money race is incredibly important because you need money to fund campaigns and get your message out. The problem is that even if Democrats had more money, their pool of voters isn’t growing as much as the GOP’s, and that puts them at a severe disadvantage going into the midterms. Of course, the elections are still over a year away, and anything can happen, but at this point in time, the GOP is in an incredibly strong position over the Democrats.

Read more …

Sundance keeps digging.

“NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down FBI contractor access to the NSA database April 18, 2016, the very next day what happens? On April 19, 2016, Perkins Coie hires Fusion GPS Glenn Simpson to conduct research on Donald Trump..”

Did NSA Director Mike Rogers Warn Donald Trump on November 17, 2016? (CTH)

The short answer is no; he did not.

Was NSA Director Mike Rogers aware that political spying was conducted through the use of searches on the NSA database? Yes. Did NSA Director Mike Rogers take action in April 2016 to stop the searches within the NSA database that were entirely due to political surveillance? Yes. Six months later, October 20, 2016, the extensive review of all the political surveillance searches done from November of 2015 to April of 2016 was completed; the NSA compliance officer briefed Director Rogers. Six days later on October 26, 2016, NSA Director Mike Rogers then informed the FISA court of the unlawful searches and his action to address the issue. One month later on November 17th, 2016, NSA Director Admiral Mike Rogers went to see President-Elect Donald Trump in Trump Tower, New York. Director Rogers never told his boss, DNI James Clapper.

The very next day, Friday November 18, 2016, The Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position. “The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed. The recommendation, delivered to the White House last month, was made by Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., according to several U.S. officials familiar with the matter. […] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters.”

Notice how the WaPo conflates the two issues. (1) Meeting with Trump (Nov), and (2) the recommendation to fire him (Oct). The October recommendation to fire Rogers was likely based on the outcome of his decision to fully stop “about queries” of the NSA database and speak to the FISA court. The recommendation to fire Rogers preceded his visit to Donald Trump, though the IC effort may have provided some additional motivation for the Rogers visit itself. NSA Director Mike Rogers traveled to New York November 17, 2016, when a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) was set up for President-elect Trump to use following the November 8, 2016, election. The next day, November 18, 2016, the Trump Transition Team announced they were moving all transition activity to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. Where they interviewed and discussed the most sensitive positions to fill. Specifically, Defense, State, CIA and ODNI.

There was a great deal of speculation at the time surrounding the visit by Director Rogers and the move from Trump Tower to New Jersey. Did Rogers tell President Trump about the political surveillance from November 2015 to April 2016? We now know the answer is no, he did not. Director Rogers did recommend an easier venue for the SCIF to operate with secured communication channels; but Rogers did not notify President Trump about the use of the NSA database for political spying. It is worth noting other events in/around this timeline. The NSA compliance officer did not brief Admiral Rogers until 20th Oct 2016. The next day, October 21 the FISA application against Carter Page was approved by the FISA Court; Rogers would be unaware of this submission and issuance. Admiral Rogers then notified the FISC Oct 26, 2016, about the NSA database issue. [In October of 2016 James Clapper and Ash Carter were recommending Rogers’s firing.]

The issue of the “FBI Contractors” having access to the NSA database for political spying was stopped by Director Mike Rogers on April 18, 2016. NSA Director Mike Rogers shut down FBI contractor access to the NSA database April 18, 2016, the very next day what happens? On April 19, 2016, Perkins Coie hires Fusion GPS Glenn Simpson to conduct research on Donald Trump. Now, fast forward to Devin Nunes in March of 2017, two similar but importantly different issues surface. (#1) The collection of information from within the NSA database; and (#2) the unmasking of names within intelligence community communication. These are two distinctly separate issues.In February and March 2017 HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes, a gang of eight member, reviewed intelligence reports that were assembled exclusively for the office of the former President (Obama). That is why he went to the Eisenhower Executive Office Building (EEOB) Information Facility to review.

After Devin Nunes review the information March 22nd, 2017, Nunes stated the intelligence product he reviewed was “not related to Russia, or the FBI Russian counter-intelligence investigation”.House Intelligence Committee Chairman, Devin Nunes, then held a brief press conference and stated he had been provided intelligence reports brought to him by unnamed sources that include ‘significant information’ about President-Elect Trump and his transition team

Read more …

2.7 bllion people?!

Washington’s Nightmare: Modi and Xi Break The Ice (Bhadrakumar)

This week, India and China have taken a great leap of faith in their mutual efforts to incrementally advance the normalization process in their bilateral relationship. This may assume the nature of a rapprochement when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi meets Chinese President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation [SCO] summit in the port city of Tianjin in northeast China on 31 August–1 September. The Sino-Indian rapprochement will be a historic event in world politics. It holds the potential to be a key template in the emerging world order in the 21st Century. From the Indian perspective, what is unfolding promises to be the finest legacy of Modi in a tumultuous political career as his 75th birthday approaches next month.

Wang Yi’s Landmark Visit to New Delhi. No doubt, the two-day visit to New Delhi this week by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who is also a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and director of the Office of the Central Commission for Foreign Affairs, will go down as a watershed event. It is a game-changer because Wang, arguably one of the world’s most seasoned diplomats, has turned boundary talks into a mission to harness recent positive momentum and inject a new dynamic into the normalization process. Wang forcefully argued that China and India are obligated “to demonstrate a sense of global responsibility, act as major powers, set an example for developing countries in pursuit of strength through unity, and contribute to promoting world multi-polarization and democratization of international relations.” Xinhua news agency characterised Wang’s remarks as the “consensus” opinion between him and India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar.

Wang and Jaishankar noted that a critical mass is accruing in the relationship. The Chinese foreign minister said Beijing–New Delhi relations are “showing a positive trend toward returning to cooperation.” Jaishankar concurred that bilateral relations “are continuously improving and developing” and “exchanges and cooperation between the two sides in all fields are moving toward normalization.”Interestingly, Jaishankar called for India and China to “jointly maintain the stability of the world economy” and stressed that “stable, cooperative, and forward-looking bilateral ties serve the interests of both countries.” The Indian external affairs minister proposed that New Delhi is willing “to deepen political mutual trust with China, strengthen mutually beneficial cooperation in economic and trade fields, enhance people-to-people exchanges, and jointly maintain peace and tranquility in border areas.”

He later said in a social media post, “Confident that our discussions today [18 August] would contribute to building a stable, cooperative and forward-looking relationship between India and China.” Wang’s visit yielded some breakthroughs, too. Principally, the two countries agreed to resume direct flights; facilitate trade and investment flow; cooperate on trans-border rivers; reopen border trade via the Himalayan passes; facilitate visas to tourists, businesses, media, and other visitors in both directions; and expand the visits of Indian pilgrims to the holy places of Kailash-Manasarovar. China is reportedly lifting the ban on rare earth and fertilizer exports to India, as well as heavy equipment for making tunnels in mountainous areas.

Border settlement: Modi’s defining challenge. The most sensational development is that the two countries are exploring an “early harvest” in delimitation of boundaries and have agreed on new mechanisms on border management, which will also work towards de-escalation. This is a highly sensitive issue, as Indian public opinion is shaped by self-serving narratives that emerged after the 1962 war and by the idea of establishing a border that never historically existed. This is where Modi’s leadership becomes crucial. Modi is probably one of the only leaders today who has the credibility, decisiveness, and vision to navigate a border settlement with China. He has prioritized the normalization of relations with China and is conscious that a truly stable relationship is critically dependent on predictability and stability, which makes it imperative that a border settlement is reached. Modi, during a meeting with Wang on 19 August, emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and tranquility on the border, and also reiterated India’s commitment to a “fair, reasonable, and mutually acceptable” resolution of the boundary issue.

Traditionally, India attributed primacy to its post-Cold War relationship with the US as a hedge against China, which, unsurprisingly, spawned absurd notions that Washington regarded New Delhi as a “counterweight” to Beijing. Suffice to say, the administration of US President Donald Trump’s erratic foreign policies and, specifically, its unfriendly moves recently to curb India’s strategic autonomy came as a wake-up call. On the other hand, India’s actions have also been partly driven by domestic economic pressures. The point is, India seeks to lift some restrictions imposed on China in recent years, welcome Chinese investment, and increase people-to-people exchanges to boost its economic confidence. Equally, facing US pressure such as high tariffs, India aims to diversify economic and trade ties with countries, including China, which may help to reduce some of the external pressure from the US.

Wang has signaled that Beijing is as eager as New Delhi to improve the relationship against the backdrop of an increasingly reckless and belligerent Trump administration. Both sides sense that they have common interests. Inevitably, a China–India working relationship anchored on a strategic understanding will do wonders for BRICS. This prospect is already worrying Trump, who has threatened BRICS more than once for allegedly working to dethrone the dollar as the world’s currency.

Read more …

People like to talk about this because it allows them to paint Trump as vain.

Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize Dreams Face Resistance (Cradle)

At least three of the five members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee have spoken out against US President Donald Trump, casting serious doubt over his chances of securing a Nobel Peace Prize, the Washington Post reported on 25 August. Committee chairman Jorgen Watne Frydnes singled out Trump in December for what he called “the erosion of freedom of expression even in democratic nations,” highlighting the president’s repeated verbal assaults on the media. Former Norwegian education minister Kristin Clemet wrote in May that Trump was “well underway in dismantling American democracy” after just over 100 days in office. Another committee member, Gry Larsen, posted in 2017 that Trump was “putting millions of lives at risk” with cuts to foreign aid and later mocked his campaign slogan with a “Make Human Rights Great Again” hat.

Two other members, Asle Toje and one unnamed colleague, have not been openly hostile. Toje previously wrote sympathetically about Trump’s legal struggles under the Biden administration, leaving open the possibility of support. Still, the balance remains against the US president. Trump himself has acknowledged the opposition. “A lot of people say … no matter what I do, they won’t give it up, and I’m not politicking for it,” he said this month while signing a peace agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Trump pointed to his work on Ukraine, including outreach to Russian President Vladimir Putin, as central to his case, with some western diplomats conceding that his emphasis on direct talks could make sense given Putin’s control of the war effort.

Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani was shortlisted for the 2025 Peace Prize for his “efforts to mediate peace in Gaza.” Meanwhile, Trump said that Israeli hostages would be freed only after Hamas is “destroyed,” voicing clear support for Israel’s move to seize Gaza City. Previously, the US president had floated a plan for Washington to “take over” the Gaza Strip and forcibly displace its people, to turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East” – an idea widely condemned as a violation of international law.

Despite this, some foreign leaders have amplified his push for a prize, with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev asking, “Who, if not President Trump, deserves the Nobel Peace Prize?” Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan echoed the sentiment, joking with Trump about front-row seats at a future ceremony. Nonetheless, with the Norwegian public polling overwhelmingly against him and three committee members on record as critics, Trump faces an uphill battle for the award.

Read more …

“..it welcomed the transitional government’s decision to end the project “with great joy.”

Burkina Faso Suspends Health Project Funded By Bill Gates (RT)

Burkina Faso has suspended a project funded by the Gates Foundation aimed at curbing the spread of malaria in Africa, amid concern that it could be misused to advance population control on the continent. The Target Malaria research team, based at the Burkinabe Institute of Health Sciences Research (IRSS), is working to alter mosquito genes to render the insects incapable of transmitting the disease, which the World Health Organization says killed 569,000 people in Africa in 2023. The non-profit consortium, which also receives funding from Open Philanthropy, operates in Ghana and Uganda as well. In a statement released on Saturday, Samuel Pare, Secretary-General of Burkina Faso’s Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation (MESRI), said Target Malaria has been ordered to halt all activities in the West African country.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1960235767168454916

“The facilities containing genetically modified mosquitoes have been sealed since August 18, 2025, and all samples will be destroyed according to a specified protocol,” he stated. MESRI did not give a reason for the decision, which came days after the project announced it had successfully carried out “one small-scale release” of genetically modified (GMO) male mosquitoes in Souroukoudingan, a village of about 830 people, roughly 350km southwest of Ouagadougou. The project first released a swarm of GMO mosquitoes in 2019 in the nearby village of Bana. Target Malaria said it had received approval for its activities from Burkina Faso’s National Biosafety Agency (ANB) and the National Environmental Assessment Agency (ANEVE) and has complied with national laws since onset of the program in 2012.

“We have engaged actively with the national authorities and stakeholders of Burkina Faso and remain ready to cooperate,” the non-profit organization stated. The Gates Foundation, Target Malaria’s largest funder, has been embroiled in controversies over some of its initiatives, with advocacy groups accusing it of promoting genetically modified crops and industrial agriculture models that benefit large corporations while sidelining smallholder farmers. The Burkinabe civil group Coalition for Health Sovereignty has previously demanded an “immediate halt” to the genetically modified mosquito project, calling it a “risky and irresponsible” experiment aimed at exercising population control. On Friday, the Coalition for Monitoring Biotechnology Activities (CVAB), which calls the Target Malaria initiative “dangerous to the country’s health sovereignty,” said it welcomed the transitional government’s decision to end the project “with great joy.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Gun


Coral Coast
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1960420423868235855

String

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 102025
 


John Waterhouse Diogenes 1882

 

Cold Hard Land, Cold Hard Bargain: Putin&Trump Head Off To Alaska (Poletaev)
Zelensky Rejects Trump-Putin Meeting to Formulate Ceasefire Terms (CTH)
Zelensky Trashes Trump’s Peace Terms (RT)
Zelensky Risks Angering Trump – NYT (RT)
Witkoff May Have Misunderstood Putin’s Demands – Bild (Pravda.ua)
Alaska Perfect Stage for Historic Summit: Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)
Risk of Sabotage of Putin-Trump Summit Is Real – Dmitriev (RT)
In Alaska Trump & Putin Could Lay Groundwork For End Of Ukraine Conflict (Sp.)
Trump Sending Vance To Discuss Ukraine With Europeans (RT)
European Backers Make Counter-Offer Ahead Of Alaska Talks – WSJ (RT)
NATO Targets Kaliningrad (Pacini)
Beijing Brushes Off Trump’s Tariff Threat (RT)
Tulsi Gabbard Is All Alone (CTH)
Bill Maher: Democrats Must Choose Sanity Over Wokeness (Margolis)
The Experts Bet Against Trump and Lost (Margolis)
Whistleblower Ties Clinton Campaign to Fake Russia Hack (Paul Sperry)
California Hospital Covered Up Surge In Stillbirths After Covid Shots (CHD)

 

 

https://twitter.com/officer_Lew/status/1953921928336400829

Jay
https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1953985193921970535

Solomon
https://twitter.com/WallStreetApes/status/1954134932026180057

Cartel
https://twitter.com/JesseBWatters/status/1953993015132852474

 

 

 

 

“Alaska showdown: Who really needs this summit more?”

Cold Hard Land, Cold Hard Bargain: Putin&Trump Head Off To Alaska (Poletaev)

Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow has marked a striking shift in American rhetoric. Just a couple of months ago, in June and July, Donald Trump was threatening the Kremlin with new sanctions and issuing ultimatums. Now the agenda includes a Putin-Trump summit scheduled for August 15 in Alaska. This 180-degree turn has been accompanied by leaks hinting at possible deals and a return to the “thaw” in relations we last saw in the spring. If the meeting goes ahead, the Russian president will come to it in a far stronger position than he did a few months ago. Back in the spring, Trump’s push for a peace deal looked like a personal whim, and the so-called ‘party of war’ and globalists still had cards to play: Senator Lindsey Graham’s sanctions package, fresh US arms deliveries to Ukraine, and the proposals floated by French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer about sending Western troops to Ukraine.

Now it looks as if Trump is the one coming back to Vladimir Putin – driven by the failure of his oil embargo. On top of that, there’s an appearance – an illusion, perhaps – that Putin is backed by a united BRICS front, something Trump’s own moves have helped bring about. Whether that front actually exists, or can survive for long, is another matter. But at this moment, one of Trump’s key pillars of leverage looks shaky, if not entirely knocked out from under him. The other pillar is the war itself. In February and March, the front lines were static, and Ukrainian forces were still holding a foothold in Russia’s Kursk Region. Kiev was touting its ‘drone wall’ project, billed as an impenetrable shield against the Russian army.

Since then, Ukraine has suffered a major defeat in the Kursk border area, and the summer offensive that followed has gone Moscow’s way – more decisively than at the same point last year. The much-hyped ‘drone wall’ turned out to be far less sturdy than promised. Kiev still clings to the hope of holding the line, but barely. Even the most pro-Ukrainian Western analysts now admit, in so many words: We don’t understand how they’re still hanging on. From the rhetoric of even the fiercest globalist hawks, it’s clear they know no amount of weapons shipments can reverse the battlefield trend – at best, they can slow it. That’s why the ‘party of war’ in the West, and Kiev itself, have suddenly taken up Trump’s earlier call for a cease-fire. Which means Trump now needs talks with Putin not because he personally wants peace, but because the battlefield realities are pushing him there.

Nobody knows how much longer the Ukrainian military can hold. From Trump’s point of view, the sooner he can lock in some kind of deal with Moscow, the better. And that urgency is another advantage for Putin. If the second round of talks collapses, he loses nothing: the Russian army can simply keep advancing until the Ukrainian front breaks – or until the next peace initiative with Washington, whichever comes first. Does Moscow have vulnerabilities? Yes – and the biggest is the economy. Even without the oil embargo, a surging ruble has blown a hole in the federal budget: by the end of July, the deficit had already reached 4.9 trillion rubles ($61.4 billion) – 1.1 trillion rubles more than the planned deficit for the entire year. But Russia’s financial buffer is strong enough that it can run shortfalls like this for years without crippling the economy.

Read more …

“No one will and no one can deviate from it. Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”

Well, we saw a poll yesterday that said 69% (up from 20% in 2022) want peace talks. At least some of them must have been aware that could include giving up land.

Zelensky Rejects Trump-Putin Meeting to Formulate Ceasefire Terms (CTH)

Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is once again rejecting any consideration for President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss terms for a ceasefire without his involvement. On a Twitter storm Saturday, Zelenskyy rejected the thought of giving any Ukranian territory to Russia in exchange for peace. “The answer to the Ukrainian territorial question already is in the Constitution of Ukraine. No one will deviate from this—and no one will be able to. Ukrainians will not gift their land to the occupier,” Zelenskyy said. President Trump announced that he would meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 15, in Alaska. Zelenskyy reacted, carrying the message from the global intelligence community who support the ongoing conflict, and does not like the idea of the USA and Russia determining the outcome for Ukraine.

Zelenskyy has banned opposition parties in Ukraine, taken control of media, targeted religious groups who he claims are subversive to his interests and cancelled elections in order to remain in power. Now Zelenskyy hides behind the claim of a constitution his regime modified in order to ensure he alone controls the pathways to peace. (Via NBC) – A defiant Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy declared Saturday that his countrymen “will not give their land to occupiers,” after President Donald Trump suggested that a peace deal would include some “swapping” of territories with Russia. “The answer to Ukraine’s territorial question is already in the constitution of Ukraine,” Zelenskyy said in a message on Telegram early Saturday. “No one will and no one can deviate from it. Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”

It has been reported that Vladimir Putin’s ceasefire terms include Russia totally controlling the Donbas region. “WASHINGTON ‘ […] Under the proposal being floated by the Trump administration, Russia would agree to a freeze of the war along the contact line in Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where Moscow controls less land than in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, a person familiar with the matter told POLITICO. In return, Russia would be allowed to keep the Donbas, said the person, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomacy, as others in this article. U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff returned from a meeting with Putin earlier this week and told Trump that the Russian president had presented the terms under which the Kremlin would agree to stop hostilities in Ukraine, a White House official told POLITICO. The official declined to describe Russia’s terms, but Trump said land swaps between Russia and Ukraine are under discussion. (more)”

President Trump does not view a meeting with Putin as a concession.

Read more …

Zelensky yesterday:

“..the answer to the Ukrainian territorial question is already there in the Constitution of Ukraine”.

Hmm. Little birdie tells me that according to the same constitution, you are not the legitimate president of Ukraine.

Zelensky Trashes Trump’s Peace Terms (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky has rejected US President Donald Trump’s call for territorial concessions to Russia, claiming no such agreement would be accepted by the Ukrainian people. Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff visited Moscow this week and reportedly made significant progress toward a compromise aimed at ending the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The US president said the proposal includes “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides and that Zelensky would need to find a way to approve such a deal under Ukrainian law. In his regular video address on Saturday, Zelensky stressed that Ukraine’s borders are defined by its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue.

“The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he proclaimed. Zelensky added that Ukrainians will only respect a “real, living peace,” warning that “any decision taken against us and without us, without Ukraine, would be a decision against peace.” Earlier this week, Zelensky acknowledged that Ukraine is not in a position to forcibly retake Russian territories claimed by Kiev. The Ukrainian military relies heavily on Western weapons, funding and intelligence. The government is counting on sustained long-term support.

Russian officials have repeatedly accused Zelensky of denying reality and prolonging a conflict he cannot win. Moscow says it intends to achieve its core national security objectives, preferably through diplomacy. The Ukrainian Constitution, which Zelensky cited, also requires a president to hand power to either a newly elected successor or the parliament speaker when their term ends. Zelensky did neither when his term expired last year, retaining power under martial law. Last month, Zelensky clashed with Ukraine’s foreign backers after his administration pushed through legislation eliminating the independence of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau, created in 2015 under Western pressure. However, he quickly reversed the measure after aid donors threatened to suspend assistance.

Read more …

“..Mr. Trump, who the newspaper noted previously criticized Kiev for being “not ready for peace.”

Zelensky Risks Angering Trump – NYT (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky could find himself on the wrong side of the US president after he publicly criticized Donald Trump’s remark about the potential need for Kiev and Moscow to swap territories in order to end the Ukraine conflict, the New York Times has claimed. Trump will be meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska next Friday in a bid to find a way out of the conflict. Russia insists that the Lugansk People’s Republic, the Donetsk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions all became part of its territory following referendums held in 2022. However, Moscow currently controls only the former in its entirety, with active hostilities continuing in the neighboring DPR. Russian forces have so far secured only part of the other two regions.

Additionally, the Russian military is in control of patches of land along the border in the Ukrainian regions of Kharkov and Sumy. In an article on Saturday, the NYT conjectured that Zelensky’s “blunt rejection” of Trump’s suggestion “risks angering Mr. Trump,” who the newspaper noted previously criticized Kiev for being “not ready for peace.” In his regular video address on Saturday, Zelensky stressed that Ukraine’s borders are enshrined in its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. “The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he insisted.

Earlier this week Zelensky acknowledged, however, that Ukraine is not in a position to forcibly retake Russian territories it claims. On Friday, President Trump said that a peace agreement between the two belligerents would likely involve “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides, but stopped short of providing any specifics. Following a meeting between President Putin and Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, in Moscow on Wednesday, Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov told reporters that Washington had made an “acceptable” offer to Moscow, but declined to go into further detail. Moscow has long accused Zelensky of denying reality and unnecessarily prolonging a conflict he cannot win.

Read more …

“Russia is demanding the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from these oblasts, but Witkoff thought the proposal was for Russian troops to withdraw from there..”

Smells like Witkoff didn’t get it right. Russia can’t throw new territory to the wolves. Who would ever trust them after?

Witkoff May Have Misunderstood Putin’s Demands – Bild (Pravda.ua)

US President Donald Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff may have misrepresented Russia’s position on a possible ceasefire in Ukraine after he met with Vladimir Putin this week. Source: Bild, as reported by European Pravda

Details: Bild reports that Russia has not abandoned its demand for complete control over Crimea and Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, Luhansk and Kherson oblasts prior to any ceasefire, and has only agreed to a “sectoral” ceasefire. However, in peace proposals leaked to the media Putin appeared willing to discuss a ceasefire after the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces only from Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

Bild’s sources say this could have been the result of Witkoff misinterpreting what Putin said about a “peaceful withdrawal” from Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts: Russia is demanding the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from these oblasts, but Witkoff thought the proposal was for Russian troops to withdraw from there. “Witkoff doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” the German tabloid quotes an anonymous Ukrainian official as saying. According to Bild, it’s an assessment shared by “representatives of the German government”.

Background:
Amid news of the upcoming meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska on 15 August, as well as media claims that Washington and Moscow want to reach an agreement to end the war in Ukraine that would lock in Russia’s occupation of part of the territories seized during its full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that “the answer to the Ukrainian territorial question is already there in the Constitution of Ukraine”.

Read more …

“Yesterday,” the other “Tomorrow”.

“..the U.S. and Russia are just 2.4 miles apart between the Diomedes islands, divided by the International Date Line..”

Alaska Perfect Stage for Historic Summit: Putin Envoy Dmitriev (Sp.)

Kremlin aid Yury Ushakov earlier confirmed that a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US counterpart Donald Trump will take place in Alska on August 15. The head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and Russian special presidential envoy for economic cooperation with foreign countries, Kirill Dmitriev, called Alaska a “perfect stage” for a historic summit of the leaders of Russia and the United States. “Historic [Russia-US] summit in Alaska on August 15. Perfect stage: the U.S. and Russia are just 2.4 miles apart between the Diomedes islands, divided by the International Date Line (one is “Yesterday,” the other “Tomorrow”). Let us go from yesterday to tomorrow in peace,” Dmitriev wrote on X. He also called for developing Arctic ties between Russia and the US.

“President Trump announces a [US-Russian] summit with President Putin in Alaska. Born as Russian America—Orthodox roots, forts, fur trade—Alaska echoes those ties & makes the US an Arctic nation. Let’s [Russia and the US] partner on environment, infrastructure & energy in Arctic and beyond,” Dmitriev stressed. The Kremlin and the White House previously said Russian and US presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump would meet in Alaska on August 15. Alaska’s authorities told Sputnik that they did not know the exact location of the upcoming meeting.

Read more …

“Putin has said he is willing to meet the Ukrainian leader to finalize – but not negotiate – a truce.”

Note: Kirill Dmitriev, for Putin, is a bit what Steve Witkoff is for Trump. Witkoff is a real estate billionaire, Dmitriev heads the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF): both come from the world of finance. And they seem to push the political guys, Kellogg and Ushkanov, to the background.

Risk of Sabotage of Putin-Trump Summit Is Real – Dmitriev (RT)

Countries with a vested interest in prolonging the Ukraine conflict will likely go to great lengths to derail the planned meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his American counterpart Donald Trump, Moscow’s senior negotiator Kirill Dmitriev warned on Saturday. The two leaders are set to meet next Friday in Alaska, with a possible resolution of the armed conflict between Kiev and Moscow at the top of the agenda. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has already rejected any truce that would involve territorial concessions, despite Trump saying they would be part of the proposed deal. “Certainly, several nations that have a vested interest in prolonging the conflict will take titanic efforts (provocations and disinformation) to torpedo the planned meeting,” Dmitriev wrote on social media.

Dmitriev, who serves as Putin’s aide for international economic cooperation and heads Moscow’s efforts to normalize ties with Washington, was responding to remarks by former US Defense Department adviser Dan Caldwell. Caldwell said there was a “concerted effort to undermine” the summit, reacting to a Wall Street Journal article which he noted was based largely on Ukrainian and European sources. Earlier this week, US media claimed Trump was pressuring Putin to meet with Zelensky before agreeing to a face-to-face meeting with the Russian leader. Trump denied imposing such conditions, saying, “They would like to meet me, and I’ll do whatever I can to stop the killing.”

Moscow has called Zelensky’s continued claim to the presidency unconstitutional since his term expired last year. Putin has said he is willing to meet the Ukrainian leader to finalize – but not negotiate – a truce. He also suggested that the question of Zelensky’s disputed status needs to be addressed to ensure the legality of any future treaty. Dmitriev has previously described the upcoming summit as a historic opportunity and praised the venue, noting Alaska’s historical ties to Russia before its sale to the United States in the 19th century.

Read more …

‘Ok, everyone, listen up: this is the REAL meeting and as such the only two REAL actors with REAL power will be there..”

In Alaska Trump & Putin Could Lay Groundwork For End Of Ukraine Conflict (Sp.)

The upcoming Putin-Trump summit is going to be held in Alaska because it is a place with a “historical tie to both countries” and it is “out of the way’ enough to avoid inviting any third parties,” says Matthew Crosston, professor of national security and director of academic transformation at Bowie State University in the US. “To me, this is Putin and Trump saying, ‘ok, everyone, listen up: this is the REAL meeting and as such the only two REAL actors with REAL power will be there, namely Russia and the US’,” Prof. Crosston tells Sputnik. The choice of the summit’s location also highlights the recognition of Putin in the international arena, an acknowledgment of his “place on the world stage.”

As for the potential outcome of the summit, Prof. Crosston argues that any “immediate and substantial diplomatic achievement” should not be expected. “This does not mean, however, that the Alaska summit is a purely symbolic gesture carrying no real impact,” he points out. “More often than not in these situations the most significant outcomes appear publicly only some time later.” The Alaska summit will likely be the place where the groundwork for the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict is going to be laid out, so this is not just a formal ‘meet and greet’ event, he adds.

Read more …

Trump doesn’t want to talk to the Europeans. They don’t want peace.

Trump Sending Vance To Discuss Ukraine With Europeans (RT)

US Vice President J.D. Vance will meet UK Foreign Minister David Lammy and other European and Ukrainian officials in Britain as part of a renewed push for peace negotiations on the Ukraine conflict, Reuters reported on Saturday, citing a spokesperson for Downing Street. Vance’s trip seems intended to pave the way for a summit between the Russian and US presidents in Alaska on Friday, where resolving the conflict between Kiev and Moscow is expected to be at the top of the agenda. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has spoken to Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky ahead of the forum with Vance and the expected Putin-Trump meeting, according to the Reuters source.

Starmer and Zelensky discussed Trump’s proposals for a peace deal, the spokesperson said. “They agreed this [meeting in Britain] would be a vital forum to discuss progress towards securing a just and lasting peace,” he added. Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff visited Moscow earlier this week and reportedly made significant progress toward a compromise aimed at ending the fighting between Russia and Ukraine. The US president said the ideas under discussion include “some swapping of territories to the betterment of both” sides, adding that Zelensky would need to find a way to approve such a deal under Ukrainian law.

Zelensky has rejected any such agreement, claiming that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. “The Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupiers,” he proclaimed. Moscow’s senior negotiator Kirill Dmitriev has also warned that countries trying to prolong the Ukraine conflict will likely go to great lengths to derail the planned meeting between Putin and Trump. Another warning came from former US Defense Department adviser Dan Caldwell, who said there was already a “concerted effort to undermine” the upcoming summit.

Read more …

“..the “counterproposal” advocated a strictly “reciprocal” exchange of territory, and on condition that “ironclad security guarantees [be provided to Ukraine,] including potential NATO membership.”

Want to sabotage? Come up with what you know will be rejected.

European Backers Make Counter-Offer Ahead Of Alaska Talks – WSJ (RT)

A number of European nations have joined Ukraine to present their own “counterproposal” for a resolution of the conflict with Russia, the Wall Street Journal has reported, citing anonymous European officials. The plan was hastily drawn up after US President Donald Trump confirmed that he would be meeting with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Alaska next Friday. The Journal said on Saturday that representatives of Ukraine, the UK, France, and Germany had “scrambled to respond” to a proposal reportedly floated following a meeting between US special envoy Steve Witkoff and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Wednesday. According to media reports, Ukraine would be required to cede all of the Donetsk People’s Republic to Russia as part of a peace agreement.

Moscow considers the DPR, as well as the Lugansk People’s Republic, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, to be part of its territory following referendums held in 2022. However, Russia presently controls only the LPR in its entirety. During a meeting on Saturday in the UK, chief aides to European leaders presented the joint plan to US Vice President J.D. Vance, as well as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, with Trump’s Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg and Witkoff joining via video link, WSJ reported. Kiev’s European backers insisted that a “ceasefire must take place before any other steps are taken,” the newspaper claimed. Moscow has consistently stressed that any peace process should proceed the other way round.

The publication said that the “counterproposal” advocated a strictly “reciprocal” exchange of territory, and on condition that “ironclad security guarantees [be provided to Ukraine,] including potential NATO membership.” The Kremlin has repeatedly described such a scenario as a red line. Also on Saturday, Zelensky insisted that Ukraine’s borders are enshrined in its constitution and that “nobody can or will” make concessions on the issue. His remark came after President Trump said that a peace agreement between Kiev and Moscow would likely involve “some swapping of territories.”

Read more …

“The officer acknowledged that NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s borders took place in the absence of a symmetrical military expansion on the Russian side..”

NATO Targets Kaliningrad (Pacini)

In recent days, there has been an intensification of rhetoric from several NATO member countries, which have made new accusations against the Russian Federation, claiming that Moscow is planning a military attack against Europe, scheduled, according to these statements, for 2027. These statements, which appear surprisingly coordinated, seem to reflect more a Western communication strategy than a real alarm about imminent threats from Russia. A significant development concerns the hypothesis, put forward by some Western military authorities, of a possible simultaneous offensive conducted jointly by China and Russia: Beijing through an invasion of Taiwan, Moscow with a direct attack on Europe. This thesis was explicitly expressed by the new NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Alexus Grynkewich, and subsequently supported by Polish government officials, such as the deputy prime minister and defense minister.

The emphasis on 2027 as a reference date appears singular. According to some interpretations, this insistence stems from internal NATO simulations that predict a possible collapse of Ukraine in that year, which could require the opening of new fronts to contain the Russian advance. Alternatively, this narrative could reflect an attempt to generate a larger-scale military crisis in order to ease Russian military pressure on Ukraine. The Russian region of Kaliningrad, which has recently been the subject of increasing attention and hostile rhetoric from Atlantic Alliance officials, is of particular strategic importance. General Christopher Donahue, commander of the U.S. Army for Europe and Africa, has publicly stated that NATO would develop a detailed plan for the conquest of Kaliningrad “in unprecedented times” in the event of a large-scale conflict with Russia.

This announcement is part of the broader “eastern flank deterrence line” strategy, which aims to strengthen the Alliance’s land capabilities, harmonize industrial production in the defense sector, and introduce standardized digital systems to facilitate operational coordination. According to Donahue, land capabilities are now becoming increasingly important, to the point where they can effectively counter so-called A2/AD (anti-access/area denial) strategies and enable power projection in the maritime domain. The implicit message emerging from this strategic narrative is that some of NATO’s statements and postures seem designed to provoke an armed response from Russia, which would allow the Alliance to characterize that response as “aggression” and thus justify its own escalation.

The key factor is timing: the year 2027 plays a perhaps highly symbolic role and, above all, is close enough to the implementation of the war plans that NATO has developed in recent years. There is one significant problem: the EU has planned rearmament for 2030, not 2027… Who teaches math to the Alliance’s generals? NATO needs the EU to fight this war. There is a communication problem in the secretariat. Perhaps it is time to change the reception staff. However, there are also those who do not share this view, such as Admiral Rob Bauer, former chairman of NATO’s Military Committee, who recently stated that a limited Russian attack on a Baltic state would not automatically trigger a military response from the Alliance, but would instead trigger a consultation process among member states.

The officer acknowledged that NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s borders took place in the absence of a symmetrical military expansion on the Russian side and even admitted that Moscow is increasing arms production beyond operational needs in Ukraine, suggesting a military reserve capacity for future scenarios. This, let’s be clear, is the most logical thing a country can do when it has an entire military partnership threatening it for decades… but NATO’s high command is incapable of seeing this.

Another factor frequently cited as justification for the Western escalation is the so-called Russian ‘shadow fleet’, a group of ships used to transport energy resources in circumvention of sanctions. Former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Landsbergis has claimed that the Russian “ghost fleet” numbers around a thousand naval vessels. Some analysts also argue that the small Baltic states are seen as potential “sacrificial pioneers” in an attempt to drag Russia into a wider conflict and prolong Western hegemony through widespread militarization. Bauer’s own words seem to suggest that a limited Russian attack would not trigger an automatic response, but rather an opportunity to intensify propaganda, increase military spending, and gain time to manage internal crises.

Read more …

“We will continue to take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests.”

Beijing Brushes Off Trump’s Tariff Threat (RT)

The Chinese Foreign Ministry has dismissed US threats of additional trade tariffs over its purchases of Russian oil, saying Beijing will continue to act in line with its national interests. US President Donald Trump has targeted major buyers of Russian crude, including India and China, claiming such trade helps sustain the conflict in Ukraine. His administration has also promoted tariffs as a way to counter what it considers unfair trade practices by other countries. Foreign Ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said Friday that Beijing’s partnership with Moscow remains “consistent and clear.”

“It is legitimate and lawful for China to engage in economic, trade and energy cooperation with other countries, including Russia,” Guo told reporters at a regular briefing. “We will continue to take energy supply measures that are right for China based on our national interests.” China and Russia have described their relationship as an unprecedentedly close strategic partnership rooted in mutual respect and compromise toward shared goals. Both have accused Washington of pursuing unilateral gains at the expense of others and seeking to derail the emergence of a multipolar world order.

India has also rejected Washington’s tariff pressure, calling it “unfair, unjustified and unreasonable.” Brazil, another major economy hit by the US tariffs, has criticized the measures as well. Trump has linked his late July move against Brazil to the prosecution of former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of plotting to overthrow his successor, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. Brazil, China, India and Russia are the founding members of BRICS, a group of large non-Western economies. Trump has accused the organization of trying to undermine the US dollar’s role as the global reserve currency, and has threatened to introduce punitive tariffs against its members.

Read more …

“..those who control power within the Oval Office keep Tulsi isolated and away from the President.”

Tulsi Gabbard Is All Alone (CTH)

The least understood issue right now, is how isolated and alone Tulsi Gabbard is on her mission to bring sunlight to the Intelligence Community weaponization and corruption.…”There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things”… The IC uses various media leaks and narrative engineers as the tools against their enemy; in this case DNI Tulsi Gabbard. The most common arrow in their manipulative quiver is the term “sources and methods.” The Washington Post notes how the Intelligence Community is upset about DNI Tulsi Gabbard compromising their ‘sources and methods’ by releasing the House Intelligence Report that deconstructed the Russiagate Intelligence Community Assessment. What has them so upset is Tulsi’s release of the House Intel report. This is the report that drove the FBI to raid Mar-a-Lago in an effort to retrieve it from Trump. This is the report that outlines how the CIA fabricated the Russiagate claims. Tulsi is being targeted for releasing this specific report. That tells you how important it is to the CIA.

“WASHINGTON DC – […] The document that Gabbard ordered released on July 23 is a 46-page report stemming from a review begun in 2017 by majority Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. It takes issue with U.S. intelligence agencies’ finding earlier that year that Russian President Vladimir Putin developed a preference for Trump over Democrat Hillary Clinton and aspired to help him win the election.
[…] The House report is the most sensitive document the Trump administration has yet released, and details of how its publication occurred have not been previously reported.
[…] The document contains multiple references to CIA human sources reporting on Putin’s plans. Such sources are among the agency’s most closely guarded secrets. After the report was completed in 2020, it was considered so sensitive that it remained in storage at the CIA rather than on Capitol Hill.
[…] as the Trump administration prepared to release the report publicly, there were multiple versions of it circulating, some with more redactions to protect sensitive information, current and former U.S. officials said. Gabbard, who has led the administration’s effort to relitigate the 2016 campaign, pushed to release as much as possible, they said. “CIA put forward their proposed redactions and edits to the document,” said a person familiar with the process. Gabbard “has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.” Trump then approved the publication of the version from Gabbard’s office “with minimal redactions and no edits,” this person said.
[…] It is unclear exactly how Trump gave his approval, or if he examined the competing versions of the House report beforehand. The White House did not respond to a request for comment. (READ MORE)”

The HPSCI report release is what is driving the CIA bananas. Despite efforts by Donald Trump to declassify the HPSCI report before leaving office, the CIA never released it. No one except the internal Intelligence Community (CIA/DNI) had seen the HPSCI report until Tulsi Gabbard released it on July 22nd. This is a key point, because the HPSCI report touches on all of the other declassified evidence recently released. The authors of the HPSCI report had reviewed all of the same information John Durham reviewed. The HPSCI report walks through the entire construct of the Intelligence Community Assessment ordered by President Obama on December 6, 2016.

Arguably, because of the underlying evidence reviewed to produce it, the HPSCI report is the most critical of the declassified release in the last few months. The HPSCI report walks through the timeline, as the ICA was created between early to late December 2016. Do NOT forget. Tulsi Gabbard is essentially all alone on this mission of sunlight. Tulsi’s isolation is the one issue people do not quite seem to understand. Pam Bondi (AG) isn’t with her. Director Kash Patel (FBI) and Director John Ratcliffe (CIA) are not with her. Susie Wiles (CoS) is not with her. In all of these efforts DNI Tulsi Gabbard is all alone. The Israel-First media and activist group is also aligned against her.

If you doubt that’s the scenario, show me a single voice from inside the administration who stood up to (even gently) defend her when Tulsi was attacked about her position on the Iran nuclear capabilities. Tulsi is all alone. She is all alone on this mission and even physically all alone when on task within the administration. Watch for it and you can clearly see it. Once you see it, you cannot unsee it. This is not about President Trump per se’. The Office of the President is not a significant participant at the moment, and those who control power within the Oval Office keep Tulsi isolated and away from the President. However, if DNI Tulsi Gabbard turns against Palantir, she will be removed. Full stop. We saw those Palantir boundary rails surface when DNI Gabbard was not fully behind the bombing of Iran.

People argue against the power of the ODNI, saying the office is a functionary only. These are historically old arguments by people who do not fully understand the nature of the silo system. Yes, this is the typical viewpoint; however, readers on these pages will note that I have said repeatedly for years now, the DNI position can be used for powerfully good purposes. The DNI can look at anything in Washington DC. Anything, inside any silo. As noted by the angered WaPo, “Gabbard has greater declassification authority than all other intelligence elements and is not required to get their approval prior to release.” The DNI can look at anything in any silo and put sunlight upon it. Yet, people claim the DNI has no power. lol The ability to bring sunlight is power. Go Tulsi!

Read more …

“..urging his side to choose sanity before it’s too late, warning that the alternative is a permanent descent into madness..”

Bill Maher: Democrats Must Choose Sanity Over Wokeness (Margolis)

Bill Maher continues to carve out a unique position as a leftist who openly challenges the woke left from within his own party. As I’ve pointed out before, Bill Maher may be a leftist, but he’s spoken out repeatedly against the woke left, and that’s a good thing that I hope helps move the party away from crazy. It’s not working yet, but dare to dream. His critiques have been sharp and unrelenting, exposing the destructive elements that have taken hold in portions of the Democratic Party. Yet Maher’s disdain for the woke left is not just comic disdain; it’s rooted in a deep frustration with how the progressive wing is unraveling the party and the nation. Whether it’s calling out the ridiculous outrage over the Sydney Sweeney ads or admitting that President Donald Trump was right about tariffs, Maher has shown an ability to be honest about the issues without blindly following the party line.

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1951495192185368991

Yes, Maher may be a leftist who hates Trump, but he recognizes that woke activists are destroying his party. Maher is not just mocking woke excess; he’s demanding a serious reckoning. His most recent monologue challenged Democrats to confront a fundamental question: Do they support the values of Western civilization? “The world is a complicated place, and it’s not just about oppressor and oppressed,” Maher said recently. “They have a thought in their head that white people did some very bad things — and white people did some very bad things — but so did everybody else in the world. But they don’t know that. They just see the world through this one prism. And until they do, I don’t think you’re gonna get them off this issue, and I don’t think the Democratic Party is gonna be able to go forward until they make a decision. Whose side are you on here? Are you on the side of Western civilization and Western values, or are you on the side of the terrorists?”

Maher zeroed in on intersectionality as the first wave of the woke “infection,” an idea that repackages historical grievances into racial hierarchy dogma that unfairly demonizes white people alone. Maher’s challenge to Democrats is radical in its clarity: it’s time to decide if you stand with the values that built the West or if you side with terrorists. He warned chillingly that many Democrats are only a step away from aligning with Hamas, with some already there. That is the stark reality Maher is laying bare. In his words, “Are you with those kids because, you know, Mandami, he’s the perfect candidate for them?” The warning here is not subtle. If Democrats continue to embrace the woke core that sympathizes with radical ideologies over patriotism and Western values, their collapse is assured.

Bill Maher cuts through the absurdity of the woke left’s claims. Whether you agree with his broader politics or not, Maher is signaling that the battle for the soul of the Democratic Party and America is no longer a game. It’s a choice between sanity and self-immolation. And so far, Bill Maher is shouting for sanity to prevail. Bill Maher slices right through the woke left’s nonsense with the kind of blunt honesty that’s becoming rare in his party. Whether you agree with his broader politics or not, he couldn’t be clearer: the fight for the soul of the Democratic Party and the future of the country are no longer a sideshow. We’ve reached a crossroads between common sense and political self-destruction. And right now, Maher is one of the loudest voices urging his side to choose sanity before it’s too late, warning that the alternative is a permanent descent into madness.

Read more …

“..nothing’s more dangerous than bad advice from people who never face the consequences.”

The Experts Bet Against Trump and Lost (Margolis)

For years, the self-anointed experts in economics have been catastrophically, almost comically wrong about Donald Trump’s tariff strategy. They were wrong during his first term, and he is proving them wrong again in his second. They didn’t just miss the mark; they weren’t even aiming at the right target. Now, with new data and landmark trade agreements in hand, the world has every reason to demand accountability from the academic class that branded Trump’s trade policies as reckless economic self-sabotage. Remember the parade of Nobel laureates and Ivy League economists lining up to denounce Trump’s tariffs as a singular threat to American prosperity? All those economic apocalyptic predictions that they repeated endlessly like gospel. They were wrong, and it’s about time they all admit it, don’t you think?

Economist John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, explained in the New York Post how the orthodoxy went from smug certainty to stunned confusion. And as he makes clear, it’s time those so-called experts learn to eat a little crow. As Lott notes, the anti-tariff hysteria never made logical sense. Experts from the right and left were quick to denounce Trump’s trade policy.

“On the left, Nobel laureate and Columbia professor Joseph Stiglitz declared in January that Trump’s policy was “very bad for America and for the world,” while University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers called it “impressively destructive.” On the right, prominent free-market advocates like George Mason’s Donald Boudreaux also voiced strong opposition. Yet their arguments against tariffs revealed a fundamental misunderstanding: They decried tariffs as uniquely harmful, while ignoring that the same logic applies to all taxes.

Take the common critique that tariffs, as a tax on trade, reduce trade overall. Phil Gramm and Larry Summers — one conservative, one liberal — jointly argued that tariffs “distort domestic production” by pushing resources toward less efficient uses. They warned that tariffs would slow economic growth.”

Critics love to warn that tariffs slow growth and hurt consumers. Fair enough, but so do all taxes. Sales taxes discourage spending, income taxes discourage work, and corporate taxes drive away investment. Every tax distorts the economy, and tariffs are no different. If you oppose tariffs just because they raise prices, you’d have to oppose every tax. With Washington spending $7 trillion this year, taxes aren’t going anywhere. The real goal should be minimizing the damage, and Trump understood that. Before his policies, the average U.S. tariff rate was just 2.5% — tiny compared to top personal income tax rates over 43% and corporate taxes around 27.5%. If tariffs can offset other taxes, they might lower the overall burden.

Experts painted tariffs as economic sabotage, ignoring that all taxes chip away at prosperity. They also swore that Trump’s tough tactics would kill trade deals. Instead, he opened markets once thought unreachable. Trump played hardball, and other countries blinked. The refusal to admit America’s leverage isn’t analysis; it’s just laziness. “Trump began with aggressive tariff threats, horrifying many economists — but the results speak for themselves. The United States has secured deals that dramatically opened foreign markets representing 55% of global GDP. Even critics have had to acknowledge the shift. “To avoid worst of Trump tariffs, [the European Union] accepted a lopsided deal,” the Washington Post conceded, while the London-based Financial Times described how the EU “succumbed to Trump’s tariff steamroller.”

The evidence shows that it’s time for a reckoning. The doomsaying economists who swore tariffs would trigger disaster were wrong: not just on the math but on the realities of power and negotiation. When tariffs can cut other taxes, open markets, and give America leverage, it’s worth reevaluating instead of parroting outdated talking points. But expecting these “experts” to admit it is like expecting the media to apologize for the Russian collusion hoax; it’s not going to happen. The lesson is simple: don’t outsource your common sense to the ivory tower. Trump’s tariffs weren’t a gamble; they were a masterclass in real-world leadership. And nothing’s more dangerous than bad advice from people who never face the consequences.

Read more …

“..It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.”

Whistleblower Ties Clinton Campaign to Fake Russia Hack (Paul Sperry)

A whistleblower report declassified last week suggests that Hillary Clinton’s campaign efforts to manufacture evidence tying Donald Trump to alleged Russian hacking in 2016 were deeper than previously known – as were Obama administration efforts to conceal them. According to the report, a former senior U.S. intelligence analyst who investigated alleged Russian attempts to breach state voting systems during the 2016 election suspected the breaches may have been “related to activities” of the computer contractors involved in the Alfa Bank hoax, who were accused of manipulating Internet traffic data. In that well-publicized case, a Clinton campaign lawyer worked with federal computer contractors and the FBI to create suspicions that Russia was communicating with Donald Trump through a secret server shared by Alfa Bank of Russia and Trump Tower in Manhattan.

The anonymous whistleblower – who served as the deputy national intelligence officer for cyber issues in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence from 2015 to 2020 – told Special Counsel John Durham he stumbled onto “enigmatic” data while leading the investigation of alleged Russian cyber activity for the Intelligence Community Assessment on Russian meddling in the 2016 election. He said that his discovery took place in December 2016 when President Obama ordered the ICA. After examining state-reported breaches of election networks, the whistleblower said, “It seemed only brief interaction was occurring – in some cases, no unauthorized access, or even attempted access, was detected on ‘victim’ systems.” Though the suspicious activity initially was attributed to Russian actors, further analysis raised doubts.

But when he brought his findings to his boss, ODNI’s national intelligence officer for cyber issues, he was ordered to stop investigating and not include his findings in the final ICA draft. “After being directed to conduct analysis of Russian-attributed cyber activity for the ICA, I had been abruptly directed to abandon further investigation,” the whistleblower analyst said. He added that his boss, whose name was blacked out in the whistleblower statement, “directed me to abandon analysis of these events, stating reports of Russia-attributed cyber activity were ‘something else.'” While the names of the whistleblower and his boss are blacked out in the report, a RealClearInvestigations search of federal records shows Vinh Nguyen was the national intelligence officer for cyber issues at the time. The whistleblower would have been Nguyen’s deputy.

The whistleblower’s 2023 complaint, declassified last week by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, also seems to contradict the recent claims of Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, and his CIA Director, John Brennan, among others that the ICA was a neutral document prepared according to the highest standards whose conclusions were widely supported by the intelligence community. The whistleblower said his supervisor also “pressured me to accept the ICA’s judgment of a decisive Russian preference for then President-elect Trump, and stated to me that he sought my concurrence as means to sway the position of” another intelligence agency. “I was pressured to alter my views on the key judgment,” he said. But, he added, “I could not concur in good conscience based on information available, and my professional analytic judgment.”

Read more …

“..the hospital averaged one fetal death per month, she said in the lawsuit. However, beginning in spring 2021, the number of stillbirths skyrocketed to about 20 per month, and remains at that level today..”

California Hospital Covered Up Surge In Stillbirths After Covid Shots (CHD)

A California hospital concealed data linking a “catastrophic surge” in stillbirths among women who received COVID-19 vaccines, according to a lawsuit filed last week in the Superior Court of California, Fresno County. Michelle Spencer, a nurse at Community Medical Centers’ (CMC) Community Regional Medical Center, said the hospital “deliberately and selectively” concealed from staff, patients and regulators a spike in unborn baby deaths that began in spring 2021, and retaliated against her when she publicized the information. The lawsuit also says the hospital concealed medical data related to the fetal deaths that showed a link to COVID-19 vaccination of pregnant mothers. The data include hospital-wide medical records documenting the number of stillbirths and the vaccination histories of those babies’ mothers.

One managing nurse at the hospital told a staff member that nearly all of the stillbirths occurred among vaccinated mothers. According to the complaint, Spencer “witnessed firsthand the exponential increase in unborn baby deaths directly correlating with pregnant women who received a Covid vaccine and then would deliver a dead baby a close number of days or weeks following their injection.” Spencer’s attorney, Greg Glaser, said: “The essence of this case is that the truth shall set you free. The hospital possessed vaccinated versus unvaccinated comparison data. The numbers proved the vaccines were causing miscarriages and more in the vaccinated group. “We know hospital management analyzed the data because they said so, and we see they concealed it from regulators because that file [requested by regulators] is empty.”

Children’s Health Defense is funding the lawsuit, which accuses the hospital of fraud, retaliation and unethical business practices. Spencer, who has been employed with the hospital since 2017, works in the antepartum, postpartum and labor and delivery units, all located on the hospital’s third floor. Before the COVID-19 vaccination rollouts, the hospital averaged one fetal death per month, she said in the lawsuit. However, beginning in spring 2021, the number of stillbirths skyrocketed to about 20 per month, and remains at that level today, Spencer said. The number is an estimate because Spencer can’t access the hospital’s full medical records.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Aphasia

IVM

Every dog needs this.

Bellamy

Click for the whole photo- worth it.

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 082025
 
 August 8, 2025  Posted by at 5:23 pm Finance Tagged with: , , , ,  8 Responses »


Rembrandt van Rijn Portrait of his father 1628-29

 

 

I don’t want to wait another 12-15 hours with publishing this. Because if it is true, and oil markets appear to think so, it puts an end to over 40 months of wasted bloodshed, and it cements Donald Trump as the man of peace. Do expect 1,000 different ways to deny, ignore and undermine it. But this is what he sent Steve Witkoff with to the Kremlin yesterday. This is the “acceptable offer”. Screw Lindsey Graham, and screw the Euopeans- think of all the new enemies Trump makes with this. Will they whistle him back, threaten his life, his family? Will it all be a dream when I wake up in the moning?

ZeroHedge reports:

Oil Tumbles On Report Of US-Backed Russia-Ukraine Truce Deal

US and Russian officials are working toward an agreement on territories for a planned summit meeting between Presidents Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin as early as next week, the people said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The US is working to get buy-in from Ukraine and its European allies on the deal, which is far from certain, the people said. Putin is demanding that Ukraine cede its entire eastern Donbas area to Russia as well as Crimea, which his forces illegally annexed in 2014. That would require Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy to order a withdrawal of troops from parts of the Luhansk and Donetsk regions still held by Kyiv, handing Russia a victory that its army couldn’t achieve militarily since the start of the full-scale invasion in February 2022.

Such an outcome would represent a major win for Putin, who has long sought direct negotiations with the US on terms for ending the war that he started, sidelining Ukraine and its European allies. What are the odds Zelensky goes for this deal… and will Europe back it? Zelenskiy risks being presented with a take-it-or-leave-it deal to accept the loss of Ukrainian territory, while Europe fears it would be left to monitor a ceasefire as Putin rebuilds his forces. Russia would halt its offensive in the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions of Ukraine along the current battlelines as part of the deal, the people said. They cautioned that the terms and plans of the accord were still in flux and could still change. Oil prices immediately tumbled on the report…

It’s still unclear if Putin would agree to take part in a trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelenskiy next week, even if he had already struck an agreement with the US president, the people added. The Russian leader told reporters on Thursday that he didn’t object to meeting Zelenskiy under the right conditions, though he said they don’t exist now.

Read more …

And Sundance has the much-needed details:

Polish News Outlet Claims Insider Info on Trump-Putin Tentative Agreement

I would approach this Polish media report with a note of caution and skepticism. The reason is not what most might think about. The CIA/GCHQ will likely be conducting covert IC propaganda operations to disrupt Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin from reaching any agreement. Therefore, for the next several weeks we should watch the sourcing of the media reports to identify familiar patterns.

A Polish media outlet is reporting to have gained insight into the deal carried by President Trump special envoy, Steve Witkoff. As outlined, both President Trump and President Putin would be working from this framework.

POLAND – Although Onet does not name its sources, it says that the proposal was coordinated with European states. “We have learned that Moscow received a very favorable offer from the Trump administration,” the outlet reported.”According to Onet, the US proposal includes:

• A ceasefire in Ukraine, though not a full peace agreement.

• De facto recognition of Russian-occupied territories by postponing the status issue for 49 or 99 years.

• The lifting of most sanctions imposed on Russia and, in the long term, a return to energy cooperation namely, imports of Russian gas and oil.

Meanwhile, the proposal reportedly does not include guarantees against NATO expansion – one of Moscow’s consistent demands. Russia did not receive any promises that military support for Ukraine would cease. However, according to the outlet, this last point is said to be acceptable to the Russians. Broadly, this type of an outline makes sense; particularly the three main points and the removal of the sanctions. President Trump has noted repeatedly it was short-sighted for the Western financial system to think they could hurt Russia directly with the 2021 economic sanctions, given the pre-existing sanctions already in place since 2014. All of my research sources in eastern Europe and Russia generally agree the 2021 sanctions regime was about Western global banking interests (CBDC), together with Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard investments.

Common Question: “What is the fundamental reason that the IC wants to prevent the US from aligning with Russia? Is it simply to keep the conflict (and money) going in Ukraine?”
My response is, No. Several facets involved:

1. Russia does not align with current global banking control. This is the background motive behind the current western sanctions’ regime. Russia does not consider the global finance system to be legitimate. From Putin’s long-held perspective the dollar is too easily weaponized for geopolitical leverage. Ironic considering that’s exactly what the sanctions are. As a consequence, the Western global banks dislike Russia immensely.

2. Ideologically, Russia is not ‘woke’ in every sense of that weird word. Even the concept of DEI is crazy from the perspective of society in Russia. The Russian economy and socioeconomic system do not recognize modern western values, ie. “wokeism”. Explaining non-merit-based DEI is one of the most unusual conversations you can have with Russian people. They cannot fathom the concept of employment, subsidy or financial benefit from gender, skin color, ethnicity or race. It doesn’t compute to them because they have no concept of the motive or intent behind DEI. Russia is the least politically correct country you could ever visit.

3. Russia is an unusual caste system that rewards those closest to govt with enhanced status. However, on the caste continuum, Vladimir Putin is more Trumpian toward this internal political dynamic. Putin recognizes that all ships must rise, not just the connected. Think of Russia like visiting Disney. Those who can afford the ‘fast-track’ pass have a better experience than the ordinary ticket holder. Putin recognizes that in the modern era this system creates national vulnerability and political instability that can be exploited by narratives from the West. An entire division of USAID was created for this task. Putin’s goal is changing this dynamic.

4. MAGA understand that Trump needs to be authoritarian in order to cleanse the govt corruption. However, our constitutional system -which was weaponized by the radical leftists- does not allow this approach. In many ways, this type of authoritarian approach is what Putin uses to ensure the same manipulation does not happen to Russia. This puts him in opposition to the global intelligence apparatus who use social friction to stir up internal trouble.

5. Finally, Vladimir Putin has often said the enemy of Russia is not Americans; the identified enemy of Russia is the CIA and UK intelligence (GCHQ). There is a big difference, and the IC feel the same toward him. Hence their activity against him on behalf of their benefactors, the London banking interests.

President Trump is appreciated in Russia because:
(A) he is also not politically correct and speaks his mind.
(B) Trump has no friends in the IC who view Trump in the same oppositional context as Putin.
(C) Trump is honest, and Russians are brutally honest people.
(D) Trump is strong but respectful toward all voices.

Read more …

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Aug 062025
 


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

 

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

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

Nunes

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

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

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

X thread

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

Tulsi Gabbard Revokes Security Clearances (Maxwell)

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

Sundance likes Tulsi. But not Pam Bondi.

Letters and Documents Purposefully Leaked by Main Justice (CTH)

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

West Has ‘Unacceptable Control’ Over Ukraine – Former PM

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

“BRICS Shield Against US Hegemony..”

Brazil Defies US Dollar Dominance (Sp.)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

Israeli Settlers Attacked Russian Diplomats – Zakharova (RT)

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

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

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

Read more …

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

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

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

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

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

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Optimus

Slaves

First time

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 302025
 
 May 30, 2025  Posted by at 10:31 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , ,  45 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Self portrait 1940

 

 

A lot goes wrong, a few things are alright. Day by day,

 

 

https://twitter.com/OCOCReport/status/1928224845516460226

 

 

Yes no no yes no yes no yes.

US Court Blocks Trump’s Tariffs (RT)

The US Court of International Trade has ruled that President Donald Trump has no right to impose sweeping tariffs on imports under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). By invoking the legislation, the White House bypassed the need for congressional approval that would otherwise have been required to take such steps. In early April, the US president slapped a baseline 10% tariff on all imported goods, with higher rates for China, Mexico, Canada and the EU member states, citing trade imbalances. Trump has since suspended some of those measures amid ongoing negotiations. On Wednesday, the New York-based court sided with a number of small businesses that had filed lawsuits against Trump, arguing that he had overstepped his authority.

According to a statement issued by the court and quoted by US media, “the Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs.” However, the ruling does not affect any tariffs that Trump has imposed under different legislation, namely, Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This means that his 25% tariff on imported autos and parts as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminum will remain in place. The court ruling has noted that the US president could still slap a 15% tariff on countries with which Washington has a substantial trade deficit for 150 days, with Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 granting Trump the right to do so.

The White House has filed an appeal, with US media suggesting that the US Supreme Court will likely be asked to settle the matter. In a post on X on Thursday, Stephen Miller, who serves as the White House deputy chief of staff for policy and as homeland security advisor, described the court’s decision as a “judicial coup” that has gotten “out of control.” There is a total of at least seven lawsuits, which argue that the IEEPA legislation does not authorize the use of tariffs, and that the trade deficit cited by Trump does not constitute an emergency as the US has run it for 49 consecutive years. Multiple states led by Oregon have filed similar lawsuits.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the global trade system in its current form has left the US “looted, pillaged, raped and plundered” by other nations. The Republican has also insisted that sweeping tariffs will help to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US.

Read more …

Yes.

Court Allows Trump’s Tariffs to Stay in Place

A federal appeals court has overruled an activist decision from earlier this week to allow President Donald Trump’s tariffs to stay in place — at least for now. Only yesterday, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled unanimously that Donald Trump‘s tariffs on dozens of countries had to be lifted. But that ruling has already been negated by a new court decision, fortunately. Isn’t it amazing how Trump‘s policies aimed at benefiting America are constantly being attacked by judges who didn’t give a hoot when the Biden administration repeatedly and egregiously violated the Constitution and other laws? At least this new decision makes sense. The Trump White House said in comments to Fox Business that the new ruling is definitely a win for Americans. “The Federal Circuit Court’s administrative stay on the Court of International Trade’s ruling is a positive development for America’s industries and workers,” stated White House spokesperson Kush Desai.

He added, “The Trump administration remains committed to addressing our country’s national emergencies of drug trafficking and historic trade deficits with every legal authority conferred to the President in the Constitution and by Congress. Regardless of the developments of this litigation, the President will continue to use all tools at his disposal to advance trade policy that works for all Americans.”For Our VIPs: The Education Department, Intellectual Silliness, and the Demise of Our Schooling. Fox Business provided more details, clarifying that the new decision delays rather than permanently overrules the previous decision:

In its decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted an immediate administrative state to the extent that permanent injunctions entered by the Court of International Trade on Wednesday are temporarily stayed until at least June 9. After June 9, the court can issue an order of enforcement. The decision states: “The plaintiffs-appellees are directed to respond to the United States’s motions for a stay no later than June 5, 2025. The United States may file a single, consolidated reply in support no later than June 9, 2025.” Hopefully, another court will step in before June 9 to ensure the tariffs can stay in place.

What should be happening right now is that Congress should be working to ensure lots of spending cuts while the tariffs bring in more money to help cover the remaining costs that have already created over $36 trillion in national debt. But unfortunately, much of the judiciary seems hell-bent on helping Democrats destroy our republic.

The previous decision, now temporarily blocked, asserted that the executive has no power to impose tariffs. “The court holds for the foregoing reasons that IEEPA does not authorize any of the Worldwide, Retaliatory, or Trafficking Tariff Orders. The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the judges’ panel wrote. “The Trafficking Tariffs fail because they do not deal with the threats set forth in those orders.” Since Congress has delegated certain tariff powers to the executive branch, the court was being deceptive when it claimed that Trump did not have legal power to impose the tariffs. But a weaponized judiciary doesn’t care about legal reality; it cares about political ideology.

Read more …

Merz has himself to prove.

How to start a war with Russia in these easy steps: Just ask Merz’s Germany (RT)

If in a dark hole, dig deeper, especially even deeper than feckless German ex-chancellor Olaf Scholz. That seems to be Berlin’s new motto. Under Friedrich Merz’s new mis-management, the German government is clearly setting out to worsen its current abysmal non-relationship with Russia. That is a sadly ambitious aim, because things are already more dire than they’ve been at any point since 1945. But Merz and his team, it seems, are not satisfied with playing a key role in fighting a proxy war against Russia that has been a ruinous fiasco; not for the Russian economy, but for Germany’s. Even by February 2023, German mainstream media reported that the war had sliced 2.5 percent off GDP.

That, by the way, is a large figure in and of itself, but consider that between 2022 and 2024 Germany’s annual GDP growth (or, really, reduction) rate has varied between -0.3 percent (2023) and +1.4 percent, and it looks even worse.

And yet, instead of sincerely – and finally – trying to use diplomacy to end this war against Russia via Ukraine, Merz’s Berlin is now taking the risk of escalating the current mess into the nightmare of a direct military clash between Russia and Germany (and, hence, presumably NATO – though not necessarily including the US any longer). Such a confrontation would be devastating in a manner that Germans have not experienced for a long time, as even a recent German TV documentary had to admit, despite its obvious purpose to boost the country’s current re-militarization-on-steroids.

The single most obvious symbol of Berlin’s new, industrial-strength recklessness is the Taurus cruise missile, a sophisticated, very expensive weapon (at €1-3 million each) with a full name you will want to forget (Target Adaptive Unitary and Dispenser Robotic Ubiquity System) and, crucially, a maximum range of about 500 kilometers.

The government under Scholz, breathtakingly incompetent and shamelessly submissive to the US as it was, never agreed to let Ukraine have this weapon. For, in essence, two reasons: The Taurus, once in Ukraine, could fire deep into Russia, even as far as Moscow, and it is undeniable that it can only be operated with direct German help, which would bring about a state of war between Moscow and Berlin. Merz, however, has created a vague yet substantial impression that delivering the Taurus to Kiev is an option again.

Throughout this war – and its prehistory, too – Russia has been sending clear warnings about what such a war might entail: According to Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, for instance, Germany is “already directly engaging” in the Ukraine War. But clearly, he, too, sees room for things to get much worse again, with, in his words, Germany “sliding down the same slippery slope it has already treaded a couple of times just this past century – down to its collapse.”

Dmitry Peskov, spokesman of President Vladimir Putin, has underlined that Merz’s statements, muddled as they were, pointed to a “serious escalation.” Less diplomatically, the head of Russia’s RT, Margarita Simonyan, has explained that German-Ukrainian Taurus strikes on Russian cities could provoke a Russian missile strike on Berlin. An important Russian military expert, meanwhile, has mentioned the possibility of a strike against Taurus production facilities in Germany.

Are these warnings any help? Of course, German politicians would not openly admit to being successfully deterred by Moscow, but it is a fact that Merz has abstained from following through on his implied threat of transferring the Taurus to Ukraine.

If he had wanted to do so, the visit of Ukraine’s leader Vladimir Zelensky in Berlin would have provided an excellent opportunity to close the deal. Yet, instead of the hotly desired cruise missiles, Zelensky has received something else: a demonstrative use of the German informal you (“du”), plenty of money (again), and a promise that Germany will help build long-range weapons in Ukraine. Considering that Moscow has just demonstrated its ability to strike such production facilities anywhere in Ukraine, that promise is the equivalent of a cop-out. For now at least.

That is a good thing. It avoids an immediate, extremely dangerous escalation. Yet Merz and his experts are naïve if they believe that there will be no Russian response to their declared intention to transfer German know-how to Ukraine so that long-range weapons can be made there.

For one thing, Moscow has just demonstrated its ability to strike Ukraine’s military industry. At the same time, even the Taurus is by no means off the table. Neither are Russian warnings about the catastrophic consequences of its use. The Russian Defense Ministry is confident that its air defenses could stop Taurus strikes, but also emphasizes that its special ability to fly far into Russia constitutes a problem in a class all by itself.

What is the new Berlin even trying to do here? Negotiations to end the war are ongoing, even if Merz claims the opposite. Russia is not, as he repeats, merely “playing for time.” In reality, the second round of the Istanbul 2.0 talks is now scheduled to go ahead, at least as far as Moscow is concerned.

The real problem for Western politicians like Merz is that Moscow is not willing to abandon its own interests or comply with unilateral demands backed up by threats.

Indeed, if a plausible Reuters report based on leaks is correct, Putin has outlined Russia’s conditions for a realistic settlement once again: unsurprisingly, they include a complete stop to NATO expansion, an at least partial end to sanctions against Russia and to attempts to fully seize frozen Russian sovereign assets, the genuine neutrality of Ukraine, and protection for its Russian-speakers.

Against this background, Merz’s recent sallies are only more puzzling: Russia is not weak but winning this war. A summer offensive may be close and make Ukraine’s situation even more untenable. But there also is a genuine opportunity to exploit negotiations that have been restarted so as to finally limit the losses to both Ukraine and the West.

Meanwhile, the reluctance of the US to reliably back up a hard course against Russia could permit the NATO-EU Europeans to explore constructive alternatives to the ongoing proxy war. Indeed, it should be their worst nightmare to be left alone with this conflict if Moscow and Washington should break through to a full détente.

The German economy will not thrive – even with a hail-Mary boost of debt-based military Keynesianism, as now launched by Merz – unless its relationship with Russia is reframed. Last but not least, Ukraine will not be rebuilt before there is a durable peace.

And Berlin’s response to all of the above? More of the same, but worse. Now, with the Taurus back on the options menu and open announcements to help Ukraine build, in essence, its own version of it, presumably under intense German coaching and packed with German technology, Kiev’s chances are not better and Germany’s position is more precarious. The probability of an escalation into a direct Russian-German war remains even higher than before Merz’s new initiative, and the probability of peace has been reduced. Call it a lose-lose.

Read more …

US Court Blocks Trump’s Tariffs (RT)

The US Court of International Trade has ruled that President Donald Trump has no right to impose sweeping tariffs on imports under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). By invoking the legislation, the White House bypassed the need for congressional approval that would otherwise have been required to take such steps.

In early April, the US president slapped a baseline 10% tariff on all imported goods, with higher rates for China, Mexico, Canada and the EU member states, citing trade imbalances. Trump has since suspended some of those measures amid ongoing negotiations. On Wednesday, the New York-based court sided with a number of small businesses that had filed lawsuits against Trump, arguing that he had overstepped his authority. According to a statement issued by the court and quoted by US media, “the Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs.”

However, the ruling does not affect any tariffs that Trump has imposed under different legislation, namely, Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. This means that his 25% tariff on imported autos and parts as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminum will remain in place.The court ruling has noted that the US president could still slap a 15% tariff on countries with which Washington has a substantial trade deficit for 150 days, with Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 granting Trump the right to do so.The White House has filed an appeal, with US media suggesting that the US Supreme Court will likely be asked to settle the matter.In a post on X on Thursday, Stephen Miller, who serves as the White House deputy chief of staff for policy and as homeland security advisor, described the court’s decision as a “judicial coup” that has gotten “out of control.”

There is a total of at least seven lawsuits, which argue that the IEEPA legislation does not authorize the use of tariffs, and that the trade deficit cited by Trump does not constitute an emergency as the US has run it for 49 consecutive years. Multiple states led by Oregon have filed similar lawsuits. Trump has repeatedly claimed that the global trade system in its current form has left the US “looted, pillaged, raped and plundered” by other nations. The Republican has also insisted that sweeping tariffs will help to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US.”>

Read more …

Ukraine Needed Western Help To Target Putin’s Helicopter – Scott Ritter (RT)

Ukraine must have relied on assistance from the West if it did in fact target a helicopter carrying Russian President Vladimir Putin last week, former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter has told RT. Russian air defense division commander Yury Dashkin told the Russia 1 channel last week that Putin’s helicopter had been caught in the “epicenter” of a massive Ukrainian drone attack during a visit to Kursk Region on May 20. The intensity of aerial incursions “increased significantly” when the president was in the air, with 46 incoming fixed-wing UAVs being shot down in the area, he said. In an interview with RT on Wednesday, Ritter stressed that “if the Ukrainians drones actually targeted the Russian president, they did not do so in a vacuum… there would have been assistance provided by the West, which means that the West is targeting the Russian president.”

“If you read the Russian nuclear doctrine, this is a trigger for Russian nuclear retaliation or preemptive strikes. So, who is playing with fire here? It is not Vladimir Putin who is playing with fire. It is Ukraine and the West that are playing with fire,” he added. The former US Marine Corps major was referring to a comment by US President Donald Trump, who claimed earlier this week that Putin was “playing with fire.”The statement by Trump followed large-scale Russian strikes against Ukrainian military infrastructure, which Moscow said were retaliation for the intensification of drone attacks by Kiev on civilian targets inside Russia. According to the Defense Ministry in Moscow, more than 2,300 Ukrainian UAVs have been intercepted over the past week above Russian territory, mostly away from the front line.

Ritter expressed concern that there is a split in the US administration between opponents of Russia and those who are in favor of improving ties with Moscow. But at the same time, representatives of both camps and Trump himself are no experts on Russia, he added. The US president “is a victim of basically the last words whispered into his ear before he goes to bed at night or the first words whispered into his ear when he wakes up in the morning… Trump is not well briefed [on Russia]. Look, this is a very dangerous situation,” Ritter warned.

Read more …

And the beat goes on.

Elon Musk Leaves White House But Says Doge Will Continue (BBC)

Elon Musk has said he is leaving the Trump administration after helping lead a tumultuous drive to shrink the size of US government that saw thousands of federal jobs axed. In a post on his social media platform X, the world’s richest man thanked Trump for the opportunity to help run the Department of Government Efficiency, known as Doge.The White House began “offboarding” Musk as a special government employee on Wednesday night, the BBC understands. His role was temporary and his exit is not unexpected, but it comes a day after Musk criticised the legislative centrepiece of Trump’s agenda. “As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending,” Musk wrote on X.

“The @DOGE mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government.” The South African-born tech tycoon had been designated as a “special government employee” – allowing him to work a federal job for 130 days each year. Measured from Trump’s inauguration on 20 January, he would hit that limit towards the end of May. But his departure comes a day after he said he was “disappointed” with Trump’s budget bill, which proposes multi-trillion dollar tax breaks and a boost to defence spending. The SpaceX and Tesla boss said in an interview with BBC’s US partner CBS that the “big, beautiful bill”, as Trump calls it, would increase the federal deficit. Musk also said he thought it “undermines the work” of Doge.

“I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful,” Musk said. “But I don’t know if it could be both.” Musk, who had clashed in private with some Trump cabinet-level officials, initially pledged to cut “at least $2 trillion” from the federal government budget, before halving this target, then reducing it to $150bn. An estimated 260,000 out of the 2.3 million-strong federal civilian workforce have had their jobs cut or accepted redundancy deals as a result of Doge. In some cases, federal judges blocked the mass firings and ordered terminated employees to be reinstated. The rapid-fire approach to cutting the federal workforce occasionally led to some workers mistakenly being let go, including staff at the US nuclear programme. Musk announced in late April that he would step back to run his companies again after becoming a lightning rod for criticism of Trump’s efforts to shake up Washington.

“Doge is just becoming the whipping boy for everything,” Musk told the Washington Post in Texas on Tuesday ahead of a Space X launch. “Something bad would happen anywhere, and we would get blamed for it even if we had nothing to do with it.” Musk’s time in government overlapped with a significant decline in sales at his electric car company. Tesla sales dropped by 13% in the first three months of this year, the largest drop in deliveries in its history. The company’s stock price also tumbled by as much as 45%, but has mostly rebounded and is only down 10%. Tesla recently warned investors that the financial pain could continue, declining to offer a growth forecast while saying “changing political sentiment” could meaningfully hurt demand for the vehicles.

Musk told investors on an earnings call last month that the time he allocates to Doge “will drop significantly” and that he would be “allocating far more of my time to Tesla”. Activists have called for Tesla boycotts, staging protests outside Tesla dealerships, and vandalising the vehicles and charging stations. The Tesla blowback became so violent and widespread that US Attorney General Pam Bondi warned her office would treat acts of vandalism as “domestic terrorism”. Speaking at an economic forum in Doha, Qatar, on Tuesday, Musk said he was committed to being the leader of Tesla for the next five years. He said earlier this month he would cut back his political donations after spending nearly $300m to back Trump’s presidential campaign and other Republicans last year.

Read more …

They will agree because they want to.

A Bill Can Be Big Or It Could Be Beautiful (ZH)

The trade negotiations between the US and China have “stalled” and may necessitate the intervention of the countries’ leaders, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said. In April, US President Donald Trump raised duties on Chinese goods to as high as 145%, citing what he described as an unfair trade imbalance. Beijing responded by hiking its own tariffs to 125%. Earlier this month, the two countries agreed to roll back or suspend most of the new duties for 90 days, pending further negotiations. Asked by Fox News’ Bret Baier on Thursday to describe the current state of the talks, Bessent said, “I would say that they are a bit stalled.”

The treasury secretary added that more negotiations were scheduled for the coming weeks and that Trump could possibly speak by phone with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the near future. “Given the magnitude and complexity of the talks, this is going to require both leaders to weigh in with each other. They have a very good relationship. I am confident that the Chinese will come to the table,” Bessent said.

On Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overruled the suspension of tariffs ordered a day earlier by the Court of International Trade. The tariffs will remain in place until at least June 9. Bessent argued that it was “highly inappropriate” for the courts to interfere with the tariffs, given that the US Senate had declined to block Trump’s trade policies. “The president absolutely has the right to set the trade agenda for the US,” Bessent said. “Anything that the courts do to get in the way harms the American people – both in terms of trade and lost tariff revenue.”

China has condemned Trump’s tariffs as a tool to “advance US hegemonic ambitions at the cost of the legitimate interests of all countries.” “Tariff wars and trade wars have no winners. Protectionism harms the interests of all parties and is ultimately unpopular,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said on Thursday.

Read more …

“This is the end of the common European project. This is a departure from democracy. This is the precursor of a huge military conflict,”

Fico Warns EU’s ‘Mandatory Political Opinion’ Spells Ends European Project (RMX)

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico delivered a stark warning to fellow European leaders during his speech at CPAC Hungary in Budapest on Thursday, declaring that the European Union’s attempt to impose a “mandatory political opinion” on its member states signals the collapse of the European project and a departure from democratic values.“The imposition of a mandatory political opinion, the abolition of the veto, the punishment of the sovereign and the brave, the new Iron Curtain, the preference for war over peace. This is the end of the common European project. This is a departure from democracy. This is the precursor of a huge military conflict,” he warned.Fico’s remarks came as he revealed both he and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán had received threats from “a particularly nervous new German chancellor,” who warned them that if they did not fall in line with Brussels’ uniform view on military support for Ukraine and sanctioning Russia, “‘You will be punished.’”

“No one in a peaceful and democratic project should have the right to treat other EU member states in this way, regardless of their size and economic strength,” he said. Fico, a veteran of Slovak politics who survived an assassination attempt last year, framed his overall remarks as a defense of national sovereignty in the face of what he described as increasing aggression from Brussels and major EU powers. “I do not want to see our sovereignty and the national identity melt away in the generalist supranational, international structures, especially those in Brussels,” he said.While acknowledging his left-wing roots, Fico distanced himself from what he called the “Brussels kind” of social democracy, instead describing himself as a “rural socialist” focused on defending Slovakia’s traditions, Christian heritage, and national interests. “As a strong leftist, I have no problem spending the night with the people on the production line to support higher night shift allowances or wage increases,” he said.

Fico’s appearance at CPAC Hungary — and his warm praise for host Viktor Orbán — highlighted the growing alignment between parts of Europe’s left-wing populism and the nationalist right in opposition to Brussels orthodoxy. The Slovak prime minister repeatedly returned to the idea that the EU is moving away from its founding principles. He warned against abolishing the veto rights of member states and moving toward qualified majority voting on key issues such as foreign policy and defense, which he said would further erode national sovereignty.“We may have to expect unprecedented decisions such as, for example, the abolition of the right of veto of EU member states,” he said. “The time may indeed come when there will be punishments for having a sovereign opinion.”

On Ukraine, Fico reiterated his government’s refusal to send military aid, criticizing the European Commission’s strategy of isolating Russia as economically self-defeating and geopolitically reckless. “If they have no realistic response to the war in Ukraine today… they cannot continue in their nervousness by suppressing the sovereignty of individual member states on legitimate issues.” He ended his speech with a call to preserve diversity and sovereign decision-making within the EU. “Let our diversity, sovereignty, and national identity be our strength and not weakness,” he said.

Read more …

It can wait a few weeks.

US-Chinese Trade Talks ‘Stalled’ – Treasury Secretary (RT)

The trade negotiations between the US and China have “stalled” and may necessitate the intervention of the countries’ leaders, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said. In April, US President Donald Trump raised duties on Chinese goods to as high as 145%, citing what he described as an unfair trade imbalance. Beijing responded by hiking its own tariffs to 125%. Earlier this month, the two countries agreed to roll back or suspend most of the new duties for 90 days, pending further negotiations. Asked by Fox News’ Bret Baier on Thursday to describe the current state of the talks, Bessent said, “I would say that they are a bit stalled.” The treasury secretary added that more negotiations were scheduled for the coming weeks and that Trump could possibly speak by phone with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the near future.

“Given the magnitude and complexity of the talks, this is going to require both leaders to weigh in with each other. They have a very good relationship. I am confident that the Chinese will come to the table,” Bessent said. On Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overruled the suspension of tariffs ordered a day earlier by the Court of International Trade. The tariffs will remain in place until at least June 9. Bessent argued that it was “highly inappropriate” for the courts to interfere with the tariffs, given that the US Senate had declined to block Trump’s trade policies. “The president absolutely has the right to set the trade agenda for the US,” Bessent said. “Anything that the courts do to get in the way harms the American people – both in terms of trade and lost tariff revenue.”

China has condemned Trump’s tariffs as a tool to “advance US hegemonic ambitions at the cost of the legitimate interests of all countries.” “Tariff wars and trade wars have no winners. Protectionism harms the interests of all parties and is ultimately unpopular,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said on Thursday.

Read more …

Witkoff.

Israel and Hamas Agree To Gaza Ceasefire Proposal (RT)

Israel and Hamas have agreed to accept the latest ceasefire proposal put forward by the US, several media outlets reported on Thursday sraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has signaled his readiness to accept a roadmap presented by US special envoy Steve Witkoff during a meeting with the relatives of hostages still in Hamas captivity in Gaza. Arab media later reported that Hamas had also accepted the deal to release the remaining Israeli hostages held in the enclave in exchange for a temporary truce. Haaretz newspaper quoted an anonymous Israeli official as saying that Washington’s proposal envisages the release of the remaining 10 living hostages and the return of 18 bodies held in Gaza by Hamas over the course of a week. In exchange, Netanyahu’s government would reportedly agree to a 60-day cease-fire.

The Jerusalem Post cited an unnamed source as saying that Hamas has reservations regarding Washington’s plan, and sees it as favoring Israel. The Islamist militant group is reportedly wary of the fact that the US would not provide a guarantee that the temporary 60-day ceasefire would be extended to become permanent. The latest developments have come amid an intensified Israeli assault on Gaza in recent days, including a fresh wave of airstrikes and a major ground offensive codenamed ‘Operation Gideon’s Chariots.’Netanyahu has repeatedly insisted that the military action will not cease until Hamas has been totally vanquished.

Mediated by Qatar, Egypt, and the US, negotiations between the two belligerents have been going on for some time in Doha, albeit producing little progress so far.The current escalation began in October 2023, when Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel, killing around 1,200 people and abducting 250 more. According to Palestinian authorities, the ensuing IDF military campaign has claimed the lives of more than 50,000 residents of the densely populated enclave.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 192025
 
 May 19, 2025  Posted by at 9:35 am Finance Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , ,  53 Responses »


Pablo Picasso Composition “Peasants” 1906

 

Witkoff Believes Putin Call Will Be ‘A Success’ (RT)
EU Leaders Plan to Talk to Trump Before His Phone Call With Putin (Sp.)
The Lesson of The Arrogant King and The Burning of The Oracles (Helmer)
Presidential Candidates In EU States Call Trump ‘Symbol Of Freedom’ (RT)
Pro-EU Candidate Wins Romanian Presidential Election Rerun (RT)
Musk Hails Durov Over Rejection of French Political Censorship Request (RT)
German Democracy Still Alive? Merz Speaks Out Against AfD Ban (RMX)
Don’t listen to NATO – Russia to Ukraine (RT)
Something Doesn’t Add Up About Biden’s Cancer Announcement (Margolis)
Democrats and Journalists Still Avoid Biden’s Decline (Graham)
Distrust and Accountability (Erickson)
Patel&Bongino Tease New Russiagate Evidence, Say Epstein Killed Himself (ZH)
Devin Nunes Discusses Likelihood of Success for Patel and Bongino (CTH)
FBI Agents Beg Court To Destroy List Before ‘Shame’ Campaign (ZH)
Weapons From Ukraine Will Flood Europe – Report (RT)
House Republicans Advance “Big, Beautiful Bill” After Weekend of Talks (ZH)
The USA, As We Knew It, Has Been Destroyed By The Supreme Court (PCR)

 

 

 

 

They all know
https://twitter.com/Juliesnark1731/status/1924143006644342845

Comey
https://twitter.com/Bellamari8mazz/status/1923733833276440628

Obama
https://twitter.com/LauraLoomer/status/1924092742889836977

 

 

 

 

Time to meet. Bring Lavrov, bring Rubio, bring Witkoff.

Witkoff Believes Putin Call Will Be ‘A Success’ (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s upcoming phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin will be “very successful” and could help clear “some of the logjam” in peace negotiations over Ukraine, American special envoy Steve Witkoff has said. Trump announced he will speak with Putin on Monday, several days after Russia and Ukraine held their first direct negotiations in three years. During the talks in Istanbul on Friday, the sides agreed on a major prisoner exchange and to continue dialogue after each submits a detailed ceasefire proposal. Witkoff hailed the talks in Türkiye as “good achievements,” and reaffirmed that Trump would like to broker a stable ceasefire followed by a “final peace deal.”

“I believe that the president is going to have a very successful call with Vladimir Putin,” Witkoff told ABC’s This Week on Sunday. “They know each other. The president is determined to get something done here… If he can’t do it, then nobody can.” Asked whether Moscow’s terms were too harsh, Witkoff said the conflict was “very complicated” and that the sides must find compromises. “I think in a negotiation like this, people take positions,” he said. “The art here is to narrow that wide berth. And I think to some extent we’ve done that. Monday will go a long way towards identifying where we are and how we complete this negotiation.”

Trump also expressed hope that Monday will be a “productive day.” He added that he plans to speak with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky and “various members of NATO” after his call with Putin. At the same time, he warned that Moscow could face “crushing sanctions” if no progress is made, while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasized that Washington is determined to avoid “endless talks” without results. Moscow has rejected demands for an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, insisting that talks must address the “root causes” of the conflict, including Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO – which Russia considers a threat to its national security. Putin has maintained that a lasting truce would require Ukraine to halt its mobilization drive, stop receiving weapons from abroad, and withdraw troops from Russian territory. He warned that Kiev would likely use a temporary ceasefire to rearm and regroup.

Read more …

I bet Trump loves that. Not last week, not yesterday, no, an hour or so before he talks to Putin.

EU Leaders Plan to Talk to Trump Before His Phone Call With Putin (Sp.)

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Sunday he and other European leaders plan to talk to US President Donald Trump again, ahead of a possible phone conversation between the US leader and Russian President Vladimir Putin. “We have agreed that in preparation for this dialogue we will talk again — four heads of state and government — with the US president,” Merz was quoted as telling reporters in Rome by the Bild newspaper. One can only hope for the further progress to be made, the German chancellor said, adding that he has already discussed the possible Trump-Putin call with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Saturday, Trump said he was planning to speak by phone to Putin on May 19. On Friday, the Ukrainian newspaper reported, citing Volodymyr Zelensky’s spokesman, Sergii Nykyforov, that Zelensky and Merz, together with French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, held a telephone conversation with Trump on the sidelines of the European Political Community (EPC) summit in the Albanian capital of Tirana.

Read more …

“Trump’s staff had left a four-hour gap in the timing of his flight back to Washington in order to meet with Putin in Istanbul on condition that Trump ordered Zelensky to leave Turkey beforehand and Putin agreed to a summit announcement of an immediate ceasefire. Zelensky was removed to Albania but the Putin’s ceasefire conditions remained unchanged..”

The Lesson of The Arrogant King and The Burning of The Oracles (Helmer)

In the outcome, it’s the old story come true again. That’s the one in which Tarquin, the ancient Roman king, wanted the Cumaean Sybil to sell him the nine books of prophecies known as the Sybilline Oracles. When the king dismissed the Sybil’s price for the nine, she burned three and asked the same price for six. When the king held out again, she burned another three. In desperation, the king then paid for the three remaining at the price he had refused for the original nine.For two thousand years this has been known as the art of the deal. As if they didn’t know the story, on Friday the leaders of France, United Kingdom, Germany, Ukraine and Poland (FUGUP) telephoned President Donald Trump and told him to keep fighting President Vladimir Putin until he accepts their price. FUGUP told POTUS to burn Putin until Russia will have nothing left to pay with.

Two leaks from the Istanbul meetings confirm what has happened. According to Oleg Tsarev’s account from the Russian side, the Russian delegation said they would agree to a ceasefire if the Ukraine withdrew its forces completely from the four regions – Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson. The Ukrainians refused. In reply, the Russians said that next time there will be five regions. According to a London newspaper’s leak from the British adviser to the Ukrainians, the Russian delegation said they would agree to a ceasefire only if the Ukraine withdrew its troops from the four regions, and Kiev refused, Russia would take two more regions – Sumy and Kharkov. The head of the Russian delegation, Vladimir Medinsky, had reportedly said that Russia “does not want war but is ready to fight for a year, two, three — no matter how long it takes. We fought with Sweden for 21 years. How long are you ready to fight? Perhaps someone sitting at this table will lose even more of their loved ones. Russia is ready to fight forever.”

Trump was sitting in his aeroplane flying north from Abu Dhabi, two hours and a thousand kilometres south of Istanbul when he got the call from FUGUP. The day before, he had told reporters ““we will be leaving tomorrow but you know, almost destination unknown because it could be here, it could be there, but probably we’re back to Washington DC tomorrow.” An hour before he took off, he said: “You know, they all said Putin was going, Zelensky was going, and I said, if I don’t go, I guarantee Putin’s not going. And he didn’t go…We’re going to get it done.” Trump added he would meet Putin “as soon as we can set it up. I would actually leave here [Abu Dhabi] and go [to Istanbul]… in two or three weeks we have a deal.”

As Russian forces accelerate their spring offensive west, north and south, burning what Trump, Zelensky and the Europeans have to fight over, the terms of the Russian deal are now far greater than Vladimir Medinsky, the Russian lead negotiator, accepted at Istanbul-I in March 2022 but were repudiated when he returned to Moscow. Before he set out for Istanbul-II last week, the consensus in Moscow was unanimous, as Putin demonstrated at his lengthy Kremlin session in the evening of May 14 with ministers, intelligence agency chiefs, and senior military commanders from the General Staff and from the front.

“Andrei Belousov [Defence Minister] and Valery Gerasimov [chief of the General Staff] also delivered reports. All commanders of the groups of armed forces in the special military operation zone reported on the situation in their respective sectors along the line of contact. The meeting participants conducted a detailed joint discussion of all reports. Based on these briefings, the President summed up the meeting results, set tasks and charted the negotiating position of the Russian delegation in Istanbul.” In Abu Dhabi, Trump’s staff had left a four-hour gap in the timing of his flight back to Washington in order to meet with Putin in Istanbul on condition that Trump ordered Zelensky to leave Turkey beforehand and Putin agreed to a summit announcement of an immediate ceasefire. Zelensky was removed to Albania but the Putin’s ceasefire conditions remained unchanged. Trump then abandoned his summit meeting plan; the record of his flight log was erased. He announced his personal success instead – “in two or three weeks”.

Read more …

EU=no freedom.

Presidential Candidates In EU States Call Trump ‘Symbol Of Freedom’ (RT)

A joint election campaign rally by Romanian election frontrunner George Simion and Polish presidential candidate Karol Nawrocki have announced plans for what the former described as a “pro-MAGA” union at a joint rally the two held earlier this week in Poland. Supporters at the event chanted the name of US President Donald Trump. Both EU nations are heading into presidential elections this Sunday. Poland will hold the first round of voting, while Romania will see a runoff between Simion and Bucharest Mayor Nicusor Dan. Speaking at the rally in support of Nawrocki in Zabrze on Tuesday, Simion vowed to reverse what he called an “anti-American change in Europe.” A critic of the EU who has been banned from entering Ukraine, Simion won the first round of the presidential election rerun in Romania on May 4 with more than 40% of the vote.

https://twitter.com/MAGAVoice/status/1923568138706354538

His words prompted the crowd to begin chanting: “Donald Trump! Donald Trump!” The politician joined the chant and called the American leader “not just a person but a symbol of freedom.” Nawrocki, a conservative candidate who is supported by the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party, is currently polling second behind Rafal Trzaskowski, who is aligned with Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s coalition. Addressing the rally, he vowed to “build a Europe of values, a Europe of homelands, in which we will not allow the EU to centralize and turn Poland and Romania into provinces.” Nawrocki opposes EU and NATO membership for Ukraine, as well as financial aid for refugees, while supporting continued military assistance to Kiev.

Speaking to the magazine American Conservative a day after the rally, Simion stated that, together with Nawrocki, they “could become two pro-MAGA presidents committed to reviving our partnership with the United States.” He also vowed to “shift our focus to bilateral negotiations with the Trump administration” if elected. The rally prompted Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk to claim on X that “Russia rejoices” at seeing Nawrocki standing together with “his pro-Russian Romanian counterpart George Simion.” Simion responded by posting an image of Tusk meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin back in 2010 and calling him “Putin’s man in Poland.” Moscow has never commented publicly about any ties with either Simion or Tusk. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova earlier blasted the Romanian presidential election as “scandalous” after RT correspondent Chay Bowes was deported from the country right after arriving in the country to cover the vote.

Read more …

Pro-EU Candidate Wins Romanian Presidential Election Rerun (RT)

Pro-EU Bucharest Mayor Nicusor Dan has defeated Euroskeptic candidate George Simion in Romania’s presidential election rerun, according to the official tally. With more than 99% of ballots counted, Dan secured 54% of the vote in Sunday’s runoff, while Simion received 46%. Dan thanked his supporters for an “unprecedented mobilization.” “Starting tomorrow, we begin the reconstruction of Romania – a united and honest Romania, founded on respect for the law and for all its people,” he wrote on X. Simion, the leader of the right-wing Alliance for the Union of Romanians (AUR), did not initially concede defeat, claiming in a post on X on Sunday evening that he was “the new president.” However, he conceded several hours later and congratulated Dan.

“It was the will of the Romanian people. We will go all the way, even if it is hard to bear the bitter taste of defeat,” he said in a video address on Monday. “We may have lost a battle, but we will certainly not lose the war.” The pro-EU president of neighboring Moldova, Maia Sandu, congratulated Dan. “Moldova and Romania stand together, supporting one another and working side by side for a peaceful, democratic, and European future for all our citizens,” she said. The two countries share deep historical and cultural ties, with around 30% of Moldova’s population holding dual Moldovan-Romanian citizenship. Simion’s party has claimed that Moldovan authorities and media outlets waged an illegal campaign to mobilize support for Dan among voters living in Moldova. Chisinau has denied any interference in the election.

The election rerun was ordered after Romania’s Constitutional Court annulled the results of the November vote, in which independent right-wing candidate Calin Georgescu came first with 23%. The authorities cited “irregularities” in his campaign, along with intelligence reports alleging Russian interference – claims Moscow has denied. Simion had condemned the annulment of the 2024 election results as a “coup d’état” and said that, if elected, he could appoint Georgescu as prime minister. During the first round on May 4, Simion received 41% of the vote, while Dan and former Senator Crin Antonescu each garnered around 20%.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1924164565862129948

Read more …

“..you can’t ‘fight election interference’ by interfering with elections.”

Musk Hails Durov Over Rejection of French Political Censorship Request (RT)

Elon Musk has voiced support for fellow tech entrepreneur Pavel Durov after the Telegram founder said he had rejected a request from the French government to block conservative political content on the messaging platform. Durov said Sunday that a Western European government had asked him to take down Romanian Telegram channels ahead of the country’s presidential runoff. He declined, arguing that, “you can’t ‘fight election interference’ by interfering with elections.” Musk, the majority stake owner of the social media platform X, responded to Durov’s remarks with a brief post: “Hear, hear!” Following Durov’s statement, French authorities acknowledged they were the subject of the claims but denied making any such request. In a follow-up post, Durov identified the official involved as Nicolas Lerner, director of France’s domestic intelligence agency, the DGSI.

The controversy came as Romanian voters headed to polling stations on Sunday. The Romanian Foreign Ministry accused Russia of interfering in the election, although it offered no supporting evidence. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova remarked that the Romanian process could hardly be described as an election, and urged Bucharest not to soil foreign nations with its mess. In 2024, Romania’s Constitutional Court overturned the result of a presidential election after right-wing independent Calin Georgescu unexpectedly won the first round. Reports linked the pro-Georgescu social media campaign to a government-affiliated consultancy firm allegedly aiming to divide right-wing voters. The case was cited by US Vice President J.D. Vance in a February speech in Munich as an example of EU nations undermining democratic norms. On Sunday, pro-EU candidate Nicusor Dan defeated Euroskeptic George Simion in a runoff, securing the Romanian presidency by a single-digit margin.

Read more …

Remember: Germany has very strict laws on domestic spying. They probably let the NSA do it for them. As if that’s legal.

German Democracy Still Alive? Merz Speaks Out Against AfD Ban (RMX)

In recent months, a ban of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) appeared to be inching closer and closer, but now a key voice has clearly spoken out against such a move. Chancellor Friedrich Merz has now said that voting on an AfD ban in the Bundestag is not the right path, saying it “smacks too much of the elimination of political rivals.” He said he does not believe the current evidence is sufficient. He has even gone a step farther, stating that former Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, an SPD politician with far-left sympathies who wrote for Antifa Magazine, was wrong to classify the AfD as “confirmed” right-wing extremist in the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) report. Critics indicate that she rushed the report out at the last minute of her tenure, despite the BfV having no president and despite a lack of any expert review, which she had previously promised would happen.

Speaking to Die Zeit, Merz said; “Working ‘aggressively and militantly’ against the free democratic basic order must be proven. And the burden of proof lies solely with the state. That is a classic task of the executive branch. And I have always internally resisted initiating ban proceedings from within the Bundestag. That smacks too much of political competition elimination to me.” When the BfV first labeled the AfD “certainly right-wing extremist,” calls came from the left, including the Greens, Left Party, and SPD, to immediately begin proceedings to ban the party in the Bundestag. Even a large portion of the CDU backed the move. Now, the BfV has temporarily removed the designation pending a court appeal, and as Remix News reported, this removal may have been in large part possible due to pressure from the United States. Merz also expressed his displeasure with Faeser’s move to release the report on her last day of work.

He told Zeit he was “not happy with the way this process is being conducted.” “The old government presented a report without any factual review, and it was also classified as confidential,” he added. As Remix News reported, the 1,100 page report contained only public statements from the AfD, and it has already been leaked and published by the German press. Remix News, in a report published earlier today, notes that the BfV is likely sitting on huge amounts of private surveillance data related to AfD members, but due to the unsavory mass surveillance methods used to obtain this data, it is likely withholding this from any official report. “I don’t know the content of this report, and frankly, I don’t want to know it until the Federal Ministry of the Interior has made an assessment of it,” said Merz. He said that it would take several weeks and even months for the interior ministry to make such an assessment.

Read more …

“..the citizens of Ukraine should not allow the ‘NATO advisers’ to lead them off the true path of settlement into the ravine of other people’s interests again..”

Don’t listen to NATO – Russia to Ukraine (RT)

Kiev would have a better chance of resolving the conflict with Russia if it resists malignant NATO influence that impedes peace efforts, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Saturday. Zakharova responded to remarks by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga about the results of the Istanbul meeting, which marked the first direct negotiations between Kiev and Moscow since 2022. The talks resulted in Russia and Ukraine agreeing to a major prisoner swap. The sides also agreed to exchange lists of conditions for a potential ceasefire and discuss a follow-up meeting. “If we put aside all the Russian nonsense, pseudo-historical statements, provocations, and so on, the bottom line is this: we managed to agree on the return of 1,000 of our people. These are 1,000 happy families. Even for this reason alone, all this made sense,” Sibiga said.

“All ‘this,’” Zakharova said, referring to the talks, “was proposed by Russia – by its president – and implemented by a delegation authorized by the head of state, which Zelensky mocked for a day.” She also noted that, if all the insults are put aside, Sibiga essentially acknowledged that the “Russian propositions have a certain sense.” “The main thing is that the citizens of Ukraine should not allow the ‘NATO advisers’ to lead them off the true path of settlement into the ravine of other people’s interests again,” Zakharova warned. Russia and Ukraine held direct peace talks in Istanbul in 2022, shortly after the escalation of the conflict. While the sides initially made progress and reached a tentative agreement – which included a Ukrainian commitment to neutrality – the talks later collapsed after Kiev unilaterally abandoned them.

Moscow later claimed the talks were derailed by then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who advised Kiev to continue fighting. While Johnson has denied the accusation, David Arakhamia, who led the Ukrainian delegation at the time, admitted that the ex-prime minister played an influential role in the decision to stop the negotiating process. Since then, Russia has repeatedly accused Western governments of using Ukraine as a “battering ram” against Russia and pursuing the conflict “until the last Ukrainian.” It has noted, however, that the US began shifting its approach to the settlement under President Donald Trump.

Read more …

It’s the timing.

Something Doesn’t Add Up About Biden’s Cancer Announcement (Margolis)

On Sunday, news broke that former President Joe Biden was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer, characterized by a Gleason score of 9 and metastasis to the bone. The announcement, made by Biden’s office, detailed that the diagnosis followed the discovery of a prostate nodule after worsening urinary symptoms a week prior. While the statement emphasized that the cancer is hormone-sensitive, offering hope for effective management, the timing and context of this revelation raise serious questions about transparency and political motivations. The key question I have is this: Did Joe Biden’s inner circle know about this diagnosis last year?

Obviously, questions about Joe Biden’s physical and mental health have been raised for years. Let’s be honest here. Joe Biden had access to top-notch health care while in the Oval Office—with a personal physician, Kevin O’Connor, who, back in 2023, described him as a “healthy, vigorous 80-year-old male who is fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency.” We all knew that assessment was garbage. Would the same doctor who claimed Joe Biden was “healthy” and “vigorous” also cover up a cancer diagnosis until after the presidential election? Yeah, I think so. I’m not saying that’s what happened, but you better believe that I think it’s possible that he did. In fact, a clip of Biden saying he “had cancer” back in 2022 has gone viral in the wake of the revelation.

“And guess what—the first frost, you know what was happening?” said Biden. “You’d have to put on your windshield wipers to get, literally, the oil slick off the window.,” he said during a speech about climate change in Somerset, Massachusetts. “That’s why I, and so damn many other people I grew up with, have cancer. And why, for the longest time, Delaware had the highest cancer rate in the nation.” A gaffe? A slip of the tongue? With the Bidens, anything is possible. Okay, let’s state the obvious: I’m not a doctor. Heck, I don’t even play one on TV. Okay, fine. I’ll get a doctor’s input. Fox News Senior Medical Analyst Dr. Marc Siegel says the presence of symptoms and bone metastases in Joe Biden’s case strongly suggests the cancer had been growing undetected for quite some time. That’s not just concerning—it raises serious questions about how such an advanced stage of disease went unnoticed, especially for someone with constant access to top-tier medical care.

Siegel pointed out that Biden’s age—82—is a major risk factor, noting that more than 80 percent of men over 80 have some level of prostate cancer cells in their bodies. “This is one of the cancers doctors specifically monitor in older men,” Siegel explained. Which begs the obvious question: Are we really supposed to believe that Biden, while in office, wasn’t being routinely screened for this? Come on. Not giving him a cognitive exam because they knew he’d flunk it is one thing; not screening him for something he was obviously at high risk for? That just doesn’t pass the smell test. So, now, you have to ask the question: why go public with this information now? The answer is obvious, isn’t it? Do you think it is mere coincidence that the announcement came just two days before the release of “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again” by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson?

Damaging excerpts have been released over the past few weeks, including one excerpt claiming that Biden’s aides were so concerned about his physical decline in early 2024 that they discussed the possibility of him needing a wheelchair if reelected. Then there was the release of the Hur tapes. It’s been a damaging week for Joe Biden and his legacy, and in the hours since his diagnosis was revealed, the usual statements of praise and support are flowing in. It all makes sense, doesn’t it? The book’s excerpts have painted a damning picture of Biden’s physical and cognitive state. And while it’s old news to those of us in conservative media, it’s getting serious widespread attention now. So, announcing a serious cancer diagnosis right before the book’s release could serve as a strategic move to shift the narrative, garner sympathy, and distract the public from the damaging information contained in the book.

Read more …

The book is out, but everyone will talk about his cancer. Timing.

Democrats and Journalists Still Avoid Biden’s Decline (Graham)

The first excerpts of the Jake Tapper-Alex Thompson book on denying former President Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline have been posted, and you can already sense Democrats don’t want to deal with what they have done. The book’s title is “Original Sin.” Why the biblical title? The authors write: “The original sin of Election 2024 was Biden’s decision to run for re-election—followed by aggressive efforts to hide his cognitive diminishment.” There is more religious terminology. “It was an abomination,” one “prominent Democratic strategist” told the authors. “He stole an election from the Democratic Party; he stole it from the American people.” The condemnations here make sense, but they are far too narrow. Democrats as a whole failed to hold an actual primary election in 2024. Almost no one decided to challenge Biden, with the unforgettable exception of Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., who ran explicitly on the issue of Biden’s inability to run for reelection and serve a second term.

Democrat state parties kept challengers like Phillips off primary ballots, and Democrats sought to strip Donald Trump off primary ballots. So the “stole an election” sermon ignores a lot of facts. The condemnation should obviously include the Democrat-allied media, who mostly ignored Phillips and his cause or told him he was foolish. They still don’t want to talk about this. Since the first previews in The New Yorker and Axios, where we learned Biden didn’t recognize actor George Clooney at a fundraiser and Biden aides pondered putting him in a wheelchair after the election, only NBC offered a short report summarizing the scoops. ABC, CBS and PBS ignored it. The “PBS News Hour” offered nine grieving minutes on a state law in Ohio gutting diversity, equity, and inclusive programs on campus, but nothing on Biden. These networks might still sound like NPR as it dismissed the Hunter Biden laptop in 2020. It’s a “pure distraction.”

The broadcast networks have displayed their shamelessly partisan reflexes, that on any issue that feels like a Trump talking point, they circle their wagons around Democrat die-hards. The “sin” here extends to these authors. If and when Tapper and Thompson engage with the national media in interviews, let’s guess there won’t be much pushback on their own demurrals and dismissals of Biden’s decline during his four years in office. Like many journalists, they’ll insist they didn’t avoid the issue—but that’s only because the voters told pollsters it was a problem. For his part, Tapper didn’t cover Biden trying to find a dead congresswoman in the audience in 2022, and he insisted Biden was “sharp” mentally when presidential contender Nikki Haley insisting on cognitive tests for elderly candidates. He disagreed with Republican critics after Biden’s yelling-Grandpa performance at the 2024 State of the Union address: He showed his age, but “he didn’t seem incapable of doing the job.”

Tapper didn’t want to be on the “wrong” side of the Bidens. Dylan Byers at Puck reported that at a Super Bowl party in 2018, Hunter Biden put his arm around Tapper and told him if they weren’t in public, “I would knock you out”. Hunter believed Tapper had reported on allegations of his rampant use of drugs and prostitutes that emerged from his divorce. Tapper assured Hunter that he didn’t report any of that—as if that’s a point of pride. Democrats and their media allies need to face a reckoning for their vast left-wing conspiracy to deny what everyone could see—that Biden was unfit to continue, even to the end of his term. This is especially ridiculous for networks like Tapper’s CNN, which repeatedly proclaimed that Trump was mentally unfit throughout his first term, pushing a 25th Amendment “solution” for him.

Read more …

“This contradicts both the new Democrat spin that Biden began a rapid decline after 2022 and also the Tapper and Thompson revelations that the decline had started being noticed in 2019.”

Distrust and Accountability (Erickson)

CNN’s Kasie Hunt interviewed Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer the other day. She confronted him about allegations of a meeting with former President Joe Biden that should have raised alarms about Biden’s fitness for office. “We’re moving forward,” Schumer replied. He would not answer the question. Chuck Todd, speaking afterwards on CNN, said, “He is among the people responsible for this. The leaders of the Democratic Party, the staff of the White House—and I have to say I find everybody now talking to these authors—get out of here. Now you tell us?” He then referred to the first 100 days of President Donald Trump’s administration as “catastrophic governance.” The American people began raising concerns about Biden’s fitness for office while Biden campaigned for the presidency in 2020. Polling in 2021 noted that a majority of the American public had concerns about Biden’s mental and physical frailty.

Former President Barack Obama’s speechwriter Jon Favreau now claims Biden declined after the 2022 midterms. New reporting from CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson notes Biden regularly had bad days before 2022, but as he aged, he got even worse. Democrats would have us believe it was stress related to Hunter Biden. But these same Democrats refused to release the audio of Biden’s interview with Special Prosecutor Robert Hur. The same reporters who now claim they were stunned and their sources would not be candid with them were the very same reporters who never fought for the release of the Hur audio and, in fact, treated the Hur report’s conclusion that Biden was not mentally fit to stand trial as a partisan statement. Axios’ Alex Thompson is one of the few reporters the Biden administration blackballed for regularly covering Biden’s decline.

CNN’s Tapper, for his part, told his colleague John Berman, “I’m not going to speak for anybody else, but knowing then what I know now, I look back at my coverage during the Biden years—and I did cover some of these issues, but not enough.” Comcast gave Biden White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki her own show. She used her show to deflect from concerns about Biden’s decline. Joe Scarborough of MSNBC’s Morning Joe told his audience on March 6, 2024, “F you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden, intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever.” This contradicts both the new Democrat spin that Biden began a rapid decline after 2022 and also the Tapper and Thompson revelations that the decline had started being noticed in 2019.

“Look, what we learned through our reporting is that starting in around 2019, 2020, there were two Bidens. There was a Biden that was perfectly workable, serviceable, seemed fine. And then there was a non-functioning one that couldn’t come up with names of top aides, that would lose his train of thought to an alarming degree. And that non-functioning Biden reared his head increasingly over and over,” Tapper told Berman. This gets back to Chuck Todd’s comments about Sen. Schumer. “Now you tell us,” he says. But what did they need to tell us? The American people were raising concerns in 2020 and 2021. It was the American press corps that insisted Americans not believe their lying eyes. It was voices on CNN and MSNBC that had Democrats on to insist the video of Biden being led off stage by Barack Obama had been mischaracterized by Republicans.

“Catastrophic governance” is how Todd characterized this opening of Trump’s new term. That, I suspect, gives us the answer to the big question—how could the press cover for Biden when the American people themselves knew something was wrong? Because, at that time, Biden was the only thing standing between the presidency and Trump. Now that he has lost, the truth can be told, except for the part of the press’ complicity in the cover-up. Americans did not need White House sources to tell them something was wrong. Only America’s top reporters did, and without those sources, they insisted until the bitter end that the public got duped by the GOP.

Read more …

They need to explain.

Patel&Bongino Tease New Russiagate Evidence, Say Epstein Killed Himself (ZH)

FBI Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Dan Bongino sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Fox News on Sunday, where the pair hinted at a “wave of transparency” on the horizon over weaponization of the DOJ by the Biden and Obama administrations. “You asked in the beginning how the FBI was weaponized,” Patel told host Maria Bartiromo. “Well, the FBI hijacked the constitutional responsibility of the Department of Justice and the Attorney General, and James Comey and others specifically decided what cases to prosecute and not prosecute. Don’t believe me? Go to the videotape in the Hillary Clinton investigation.” Cool, cool.”We don’t decide prosecutions, and neither does any agent or intel analyst. We have great partners under Attorney General [Pam] Bondi. We work with them and discuss the matter with them, but the prosecutorial decision is with them,” Patel continued.

No rush on those indictments and pre-dawn raids, guys. The pair also said they’ve uncovered additional details regarding the Obama DOJ’s Crossfire Hurricane (Russiagate) investigation, and are working with Congress on it – which for some reason they have to do before they can release it. Of note, Patel was previously the House Intelligence Committee’s lead Russiagate investigator. “They bastardized the process, they withheld and hid documentation and put it in rooms where people weren’t supposed to look,” he said. “That’s how vindictive and vicious the former leadership structure here was. Not only did they bastardize the FISA process and lie to the American public, they withheld and hid documentation and put it in rooms where people weren’t supposed to look,” Patel continued, adding “It’s a good thing we’re here now to clean it up, and you’re about to see a wave of transparency… Just give us about a week or two.”

In another segment, the pair insisted that pedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein definitely killed himself. “You said Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide. People don’t believe it,” said Bartiromo. “They have a right to their opinion,” Patel replied. “But as someone who’s been a public defender, a prosecutor, who’s worked in that prison system and been inside segregated housing——you know a suicide when you see one. And that’s what that was.” Bongino concurred, saying “He killed himself.”

https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1924128234439844211?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1924128234439844211%7Ctwgr%5E87a70587f03f5b008b4ef25a44ed1da9929a9db7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpatel-bongino-tease-russiagate-accountability-wave-transparency-yet-insist-jeffrey

So, Epstein, whose cellmate moved out the day before he died, was able to kill himself right at the moment security cameras malfunctioned and his guards fell asleep. And other inmates reportedly heard “shouting and shrieking” from Epstein’s jail cell the morning he died. And some footage which was apparently recovered was deemed “too flawed for investigators to use.” And this was a photo of the ‘noose’ he used:

And coroner Dr. Michael Baden said his autopsy was more consistent with homicidal strangulation than suicide. Right. Remember when Elon Musk told Joe Rogan he can’t dig too deep into government corruption or he’ll be wet work’d? Bongino’s reply to the above question has the same vibes.

https://twitter.com/InternetH0F/status/1896455529813139858?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1896455529813139858%7Ctwgr%5E87a70587f03f5b008b4ef25a44ed1da9929a9db7%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fpatel-bongino-tease-russiagate-accountability-wave-transparency-yet-insist-jeffrey

Read more …

“..for Obama to take the nomination, the presidency and then eventually support Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election bid. Obama would appoint Clinton to Secretary of State, Hillary would then use her office to build wealth for herself and her family, and then HRC would exit the Dept of State to begin her presidential run.”

Devin Nunes Discusses Likelihood of Success for Patel and Bongino (CTH)

Former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes is a man very familiar with the Russiagate nonsense and the weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and CIA against candidate Donald Trump and later President Trump. Within this interview Nunes hits on a few good points, the most accurate is his focus on the motives and intents of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who was installed as the cover-up operation for Crossfire Hurricane. However, Nunes gets a part of the origin a little askew and inaccurately framed. The original agreement between Clinton and Obama going back to 2008 was for Obama to take the nomination, the presidency and then eventually support Hillary Clinton’s 2016 election bid. Obama would appoint Clinton to Secretary of State, Hillary would then use her office to build wealth for herself and her family, and then HRC would exit the Dept of State to begin her presidential run.

John Podesta would enter the Obama administration as Hillary left in 2013. Podesta would look out for Hillary’s interests from his position inside the Obama White House. The Clintons and Obamas never fully trusted each other. Barack Obama would put all the mechanisms into place that would transition his administration into Hillary Clintons’. That was always the plan. In 2015 Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had a check-in meeting; just touching base to firm up the goals and objectives as Hillary began her campaign launch. Podesta left the White House to take up position inside the campaign, and Team Obama would maintain Clinton’s interests as planned without an insider.

All of President Obama’s appointments in after 2015, were essentially through the prism of assisting Hillary Clinton to win in 2016. Attorney General Loretta Lynch (tarmac meeting), Deputy AG Sally Yates, Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe and FBI Director James Comey were all part of that. Technically Hillary had eyes and ears all over the White House at the time, and with Hillary Clinton being a foregone conclusion per the expectations of Washington DC, everyone would fall in line during the transition from Obama to Clinton. Again, this was the general plan. Obama would show up in 2016 to campaign for Hillary and all would be seamless.The FBI was aware of the plan for transition from Obama to Clinton, hence their role in eliminating the threat later presented by the Clinton, as Secretary of State, laptop scandal and the subsequent issues of classified information.

Remember, Clinton’s motive as Secretary of State was to sell her position for material wealth; that’s why she used a personal email, maintained her own servers, and generally controlled how her activity could be monitored and tracked. [Also, she didn’t fully trust Obama] When the Clinton campaign launched the Russia Collusion dirty trick move against her opponent Donald Trump, originally using Fusion GPS and Glenn Simpson, the role of the Obama administration was to facilitate the political hit, and at the very least not impede it. Hence, former CIA Director John Brennan briefing Barack Obama on the status of the Russia collusion hoax as it spread in 2016 via the Clinton campaign.

Specifically because President Obama was, by extension, now a participant in the Clinton created “Russia Collusion hoax,” and specifically because his administration officials were participants in the process (DOJ, FBI), when President Trump won the 2016 election. President Barack Obama was now exposed by the threat the operation represented. This context is the impetus for the January 5, 2017, Susan Rice memo. Following the surprising result in the 2016 election, the team around Obama was urgently framing plausible deniability. President Obama did not orchestrate the Russia Collusion hoax; he facilitated it by not interfering with his administration officials who were assisting Hillary Clinton. This is a very key distinction. President Obama knew what was going on, he was willfully blind as it was carried out. However, the mess and fallout from the extreme lengths his FBI and DOJ officials went eventually represented a threat to Obama.

Robert Mueller and all 19 of his Clinton-aligned Lawfare operatives, were put into place to cover-up the entire mess created within the Russia Collusion operation. Mueller +19 continued the Crossfire Hurricane operation, while the extreme Lawfare strategy was deployed against the Trump administration. That’s the short, encapsulated version. The Russia Collusion hoax was created by Hillary Clinton, spread to media through Fusion GPS and given the patina of credibility by the DOJ and FBI. President Obama facilitated the operation by not interfering in the operation, until it became a threat to him personally. Both the Obama and Clinton political teams supported and organized the Robert Mueller cover-up.

Read more …

“..if they can be charged, we’ll charge them. But if they can’t be charged, we will name them.”

FBI Agents Beg Court To Destroy List Before ‘Shame’ Campaign (ZH)

A group of FBI agents involved in the Jan. 6 investigations asked a judge Thursday to destroy a Trump administration list containing the names of roughly 5,000 agents tied to the probes. Their move follows Ed Martin’s vow, as the newly appointed weaponization czar, to “name” and “shame” the thousands of agents who helped crack down on more than 1,000 Americans allegedly involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, protests. The anonymous agents told U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb that Martin’s public pledge signals the federal government plans to release the list. They first sued in February, asking the court to destroy or seal the roster.

Their Thursday filing came after Martin promised at a Tuesday press conference to hold the agents accountable for destroying the lives of more than 1,000 Jan. 6 defendants. “There are some really bad actors, some people that did some really bad things to the American people. And if they can be charged, we’ll charge them. But if they can’t be charged, we will name them. And in a culture that respects shame, they should be people that are ashamed. And that’s a fact. That’s the way things work. And so that’s, that’s how I believe the job operates.”

The agents argue Martin’s rhetoric puts them in greater danger of retribution by the pardoned Jan. 6 defendants. “Mr. Martin’s statements represent new, relevant facts worthy of the Court’s attention while it considers Plaintiffs’ requested relief,” their filing claimed, according to Law and Crime. The agents are represented by a group of attorneys that includes Mark Zaid, who is also suing President Trump over revoked security clearances. Zaid is also representing former FBI agent Jamie Mannina in a defamation suit against journalist James O’Keefe, after O’Keefe released undercover footage of Mannina expressing his contempt for Trump.

Read more …

“..some EU institutions continue to push for Ukraine’s accession to the bloc. Analysts say this could further weaken border controls and oversight mechanisms..”

Weapons From Ukraine Will Flood Europe – Report (RT)

A massive influx of weapons from Ukraine will hit Europe’s black markets after the conflict with Russia is over, according to a new report by the Eurasia Observatory, which tracks the conflict’s long-term impact on organized crime. Western-supplied weapons and thousands of battle-hardened Ukrainian veterans are expected to fuel a wave of crime, arms trafficking, and instability across the continent – as talks between Moscow and Kiev to resolve the conflict raise hopes for a ceasefire – the document warns. ”Stockpiles of weapons, including heavy arms, are being amassed throughout Ukraine,” the report says. “Should the fighting stop, martial law in Ukraine will presumably be lifted, reducing the resources and powers of the state to police the civilian sphere – and opening up the field for organized crime to operate more freely.”

Kiev received over $363 billion (€326 billion) in NATO aid by February 2025, according to the Kiel Institute. Porous borders and weak oversight may fail to stop smuggled weapons such as rifles, grenades, and missile systems, according to the document. Earlier this year, US journalist Tucker Carlson claimed that the Ukrainian military was selling American weapons systems “on the black market, including to drug cartels.” Western media and officials have acknowledged that weapons sent to Kiev have ended up in criminal hands. Europol reported in April 2022 that arms were being trafficked from Ukraine into the EU for organized crime groups. Later that year, the Finnish authorities confirmed that these weapons had surfaced locally, with similar findings in Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands.

By mid-2024, Spanish media reported gangs in southern Spain had acquired modern weapons allegedly smuggled from Ukraine. The return of Ukrainian soldiers skilled in sabotage, drones, and cyber warfare poses a threat, with the report warning that they could become a “valuable resource” for criminal networks in Europe. Corruption in Ukraine is a major concern, with the most recent estimate showing Ukraine will require $524 billion to repair the damage from the war. The report warns that criminals could exploit the process to launder money and gain influence.

Despite mounting concerns over arms trafficking and fraud, some EU institutions continue to push for Ukraine’s accession to the bloc. Analysts say this could further weaken border controls and oversight mechanisms. The report warns that without a coordinated long-term strategy, Western nations risk facing the fallout of a conflict that Moscow claims they helped fuel and now struggle to control. Russia has warned against Western weapons deliveries to Ukraine, saying they only serve to prolong the conflict and heighten regional security threats. It has also said the unchecked supply of weapons has resulted in a large number falling into the hands of organized criminal groups and extremists worldwide.

Read more …

It’ll still take a while. Senate next.

House Republicans Advance “Big, Beautiful Bill” After Weekend of Talks (ZH)

Following a Friday fracas on Capitol Hill which saw House Republicans fail to advance President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” out of the House Budget Committee, Republicans on said Committee did just that after several GOP deficit hawks relented. And while the bill still has a couple of stops before it can hit the House Floor, passage to the Senate could come as early as the end of this week. The measure passed narrowly, 17-16, with all Democrats opposed and four Republicans; Reps. Chip Roy of Texas, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Josh Brecheen of Oklahoma – voting “present” after voting “No” on the bill in a 16-21 vote just two days earlier. The sudden turnaround followed a weekend of furious negotiations that remain largely behind closed doors.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) met with fellow lawmakers shortly before Sunday’s vote and told reporters that there had been “some minor modifications,” several sources posted on X. Johnson said the bill, which includes making Trump’s 2017 tax cuts permanent and reforming Medicaid, is now “on track” for a House floor vote toward the end of this week.The vote was a big win for Johnson and Trump, coming just two days after Republican opposition torpedoed the bill’s first attempt at committee passage. Despite this procedural victory, the legislation must still clear the House Rules Committee and secure a vote on the House floor, where Republicans hold only a razor-thin majority, Axios reports. Norman, one of the Republicans who shifted his position, said he was “excited about the changes” in the works for the bill.

Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-TX) confirmed during the Sunday night session that “most likely there would be some changes” to the measure before it reaches the floor – but he couldn’t comment on specifics or any side deals that might have been struck. The panel’s reversal came after it initially rejected the legislation Friday, setting off a scramble to renegotiate terms with holdout Republicans. One of the most contentious elements has been the GOP’s proposed Medicaid overhaul, with conservatives pushing for deeper structural changes and moderates raising concerns about the political risks.

Even if the package passes the House, Senate Republicans are expected to propose their own revisions. To that end, Johnson has also been working to secure buy-in from blue state Republicans by exploring a compromise on the State and Local Tax (SALT) deduction cap. On Friday, Trump did his usual shit-talking to pressure Republicans into line – posting on Truth Social; “We don’t need ‘GRANDSTANDERS’ in the Republican Party. STOP TALKING, AND GET IT DONE!”

Read more …

“..it is possible that they could save themselves if there was a massive violent uprising, but the people are too weak-minded and weak-willed..”

The USA, As We Knew it, Has Been Destroyed By The Supreme Court (PCR)

“The Supreme Court has just ruled that the worst murderers, drug dealers, gang members, and even those who are mentally insane, who came into our Country illegally, are not allowed to be forced out without going through a long, protracted, and expensive Legal Process, one that will take, possibly, many years for each person, and one that will allow these people to commit many crimes before they even see the inside of a Courthouse. The result of this decision will let more CRIMINALS pour into our Country, doing great harm to our cherished American public. It will also encourage other criminals to illegally enter our Country, wreaking havoc and bedlam wherever they go. The Supreme Court of the United States is not allowing me to do what I was elected to do. Sleepy Joe Biden allowed MILLIONS of Criminal Aliens to come into our Country without any “PROCESS” but, in order to get them out of our Country, we have to go through a long and extended PROCESS. In any event, thank you to Justice Alito and Justice Thomas for attempting to protect our Country. This is a bad and dangerous day for America!” — President Trump, Truth Social, May 16, 2025 at 5:59 PM

As I predicted, the liberal-left, committed as it is to the establishment of a Sodom & Gomorrah Tower of Babel, used the mindless judiciary to protect “rights” of non-citizens who broke the law by entering the country illegally. The judges defined the preservation of America in terms of defending “rights” for illegals who are not US citizens to use US courts to evade enforcement of US law. No one knows where these American rights of non-Americans came from, but the morons on the Supreme Court are defending them. The Supreme Court’s ruling against America in favor of illegal aliens reads like the babel of an insane asylum. Which is what the court is. Instead of standing when judges enter the courtroom, they should be pelted with rotten tomatoes and rotten eggs. There is no reason to respect them as they do not respect America and its Constitution. Most of them are activists for overthrowing traditional America.

The judiciary has also created a fourth branch of government, the civil service or executive branch employees, who the judiciary has now made independent of presidential control. So, five months into the presidential term, my prediction has come true that the Democrats, committed as they are to the replacement of white racist Americans with people of color, would use the courts to defeat the will of the people as expressed in the presidential election.

Americans do not realize, despite the over-abundance of evidence, that they have been in a civil war for many years. That a civil war was underway became completely and totally clear in 2016 and again in 2020 and again during the Biden regime’s illegal prosecutions of Donald Trump and falsely accused and incarcerated “insurrectionists.” That the US Department of Justice and federal courts could be used to imprison American patriots who protested a stolen presidential election demonstrated for even morons to see that the Democrat liberal-left was committed to overthrowing America.

Parents in every state had the evidence before their noses every day of the school year. In place of education, white kids were taught, and still are, that they are racists, along with their parents and grandparents, that they might have been born into the wrong body, that gender is unrelated to biology and determined by self-declaration. Parents who resisted sex change operations for their underage children risked losing them to seizure by Child Protective Services. Young kids were being sexualized at an early age, taught how to give oral sex and to copulate. The Democrats heavily into pedophilia are creating receptive children for themselves. Merit was abandoned as a basis for admission to quality schools for the gifted and as the basis for graduation, resulting in the destruction of the educational experience once offered to the gifted, people America certainly needs.

Corporations and even the military sidelined hiring and promotion for white heterosexual Americans in order to give illegal preference to DEI. Corporate advertising promoted, and still does, miscegenation. Democrat political jurisdictions permitted Antifa and Black Lives Matter to loot and burn white business areas of cities and refused to prosecute. Laws were passed that reduced the accountability of people of color for crimes. For these and many other reasons enough of the insouciant American population saw the light and responded by electing an American as president. It only took 7 Supreme Court justices and a sprinkling of Democrat federal district judges to defeat the American people’s uprising. Americans need to understand that the Supreme Court with its ruling has destroyed America.

A country that cannot defend its borders and that cannot deport illegal entrants is described in Jean Raspail’s The Camp of the Saints, a description of the fate that awaits white Americans, but Americans cannot stop scrolling their cell phones long enough to read a book that tells their future. If Americans understood what awaits them, it is possible that they could save themselves if there was a massive violent uprising, but the people are too weak-minded and weak-willed to save themselves even if they could face up to the threat. With my prediction that Trump’s agenda would be blocked proven true, I am encouraged to offer another prediction. The Democrats will steal the mid-term elections. The RINO Republicans, media, and judiciary will help them in order to get rid of Trump. Next, President Trump will be successfully impeached, and he and members of his government and supporters will be prosecuted.

White heterosexual Americans will be discriminated against in every aspect of life. All who protest will face charges. The United States of America is about to disappear. My backup prediction is that the American Establishment will override the Democrat liberal-left, because the ruling establishment sees Trump as an effective agent for their construction of an American neo-colonial empire consisting of Greenland, Panama, Gaza, and the Middle East. This opens up new avenues of plunder for the ruling elite. The destruction of American unity that the Democrat liberal-left has achieved plays into the hands of the elite as the absence of unity prevents constraints on their privatization of government. Now that I think about it, my backup prediction could well be the most likely one.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1933

222

China

https://twitter.com/Mappy6984/status/1923933323983827214

https://twitter.com/Ric_RTP/status/1924102595125100637

https://twitter.com/RyanPatrick1991/status/1924186964980617571

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 152025
 


Kazemir Malevich Floor polishers 1912

 

Why China Will Win The Arms Race (Wolfgang Münchau)
Russian Delegation Will Be Waiting For Ukrainians In Istanbul – Kremlin (RT)
Zelensky Claims Ban On Russia Talks Doesn’t Apply To Him (RT)
Zelensky’s Regime Only Stable When At War – Former Senior UN Official (RT)
Rubio and Witkoff Will Travel To Istanbul On Friday – Reuters (RT)
Trump Envoy Kellogg Reveals NATO Troop Deployment Plans For Ukraine (RT)
US Opposes Zelensky Attendance At NATO Summit (RT)
The Unraveling of The Old World Order And The Role of Russia (Bordachev)
Russia Doesn’t Need Western Approval To Shape Global History (Lukyanov)
Trump Shocks the World – Again (Spencer)
Qatar Commits To “Largest Order Of Jets In The History Of Boeing” (NYP)
Every Anti-Trump Economic Narrative Is Collapsing (Margolis)
Trump Economy Defies ‘Gloom And Doom’ Expectations (Whedon)
Federal Judge Says Trump’s Invocation of Alien Enemies Act Was Legal (ET)
Average Americans Poised for Double-Digit Tax Cuts In 2027 (ZH)
Court Rules On Von Der Leyen’s Secret Covid Vaccine Deal Messages (RT)
Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Signed Oath to Conceal COVID Info (YN)
A New False Tribunal Is In The Making (Stephen Karganovic)

 

 

 

 

Tulsi

Assange

1940

Alex

“Russia. Kremlin. Putin. 25 years”

Tucker Carlson interviews Ed Martin

 

 

 

 

“..a swarm of AI-powered drones..”

Why China Will Win The Arms Race (Wolfgang Münchau)

When Donald Trump visits the Middle East this week, he will bump into some familiar people. Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Fink and Sam Altman will also be in Riyadh. I doubt they will spend much time talking about Gaza, or Iran. They are all there for the same reason: to talk about AI. The stock markets have currently put a high price on these tech companies. But AI is also commanding a high price from America’s foreign and security policy community: it will change the nature of warfare more profoundly than any other innovation we have experienced in our lifetimes. Ronald Reagan’s infamous Strategy Defence Initiative, also known as Star Wars, failed because the old technology could not deliver the precision that was needed. But AI could make it a reality and America’s concern is that China might get there first.

But America also worries that they are leading the charge with AI-powered drones. We think of drones as modern, but those used in the Russia-Ukraine war still need an operator. Imagine, then, if one side had AI-powered drones at their disposal? The West and Nato may be comfortable in their current — swiftly dating — military capabilities. But AI warfare is a completely new game. And China is already forging ahead in the two areas that will prove critical. The first is the supply of energy — which is vital to power large AI data centres. The West should be concerned by the sheer scale of the expansion of China’s energy capacity. China has a renewable capacity target of 2,461 gigawatts by 2030. The corresponding numbers for the EU and US are respectively 1,100 and 500 gigawatts.

For the Chinese, the heavy lifting will come from renewable sources, such as the world’s largest hydropower plant in Tibet, which will have an energy capacity roughly the size of Germany’s capacity today. Just from one single dam. This dam is not even included in China’s target number. AI is furiously energy-hungry. As the car industry has only recently found out, the electric car is not just an evolution — it is a different product. The same applies to anything reliant on AI. Germany’s Rheinmetall is a formidable producer of ammunition and tanks. They make the best tanks in the world. But they are old-school — the heavy-metal version of defence manufacturing. You don’t want to be in one of them when being attacked by a swarm of AI-powered drones.

And so, as China marches ahead, Europe’s absurd data protection regulations and AI regulation effectively criminalise the 21st century’s most important evolving business sector. The Financial Times reported that British soldiers were prevented from using signal jamming on the grounds that it violated GDPR. Europeans have, in general, no idea what damage they are inflicting upon themselves with their absurd data protection obsession. And no clue what it does to their security. In the gilded foreign policy salons of Europe’s capitals, you will not hear much about AI-drones, or satellite-based AI-missiles systems. It is as though AI has yet to be invented in the Western foreign policy universe.

China, meanwhile, has more energy than we do, puts serious money into AI, and is not regulating itself to death. Take 5G. While we Europeans struggle with it, the Chinese are already developing 6G — the technology which is needed to handle the communications for next generation manufacturing. This is the second critical area in which China is excelling: high-tech manufacturing. In the US and the UK, the prevailing view is that sophisticated countries should move into services and leave the shop-floor economy to upstarts like China. This is a story we have been telling ourselves for too long. And it is one that economists, in particular, don’t understand.

They think it is more efficient to let China do all the manufacturing, for the US to specialise in high tech and finance, and to let Europe be a museum. They are simultaneously oblivious to those voters who want real jobs, to the nature of 21st-century manufacturing, and to security concerns. The irony here is that the US understands the AI-service economy like no one else. And it still just about leads the world in research. But China has been able to catch up because all the new technology is open-source. As an anonymous employee at Google candidly admitted: “We have no moat, and neither does OpenAI.” Nor does the US. This is not a world of secret algorithms, or of industrial patents. The costs of entry are low — all you need is a bunch of desktop computers with a good graphics card. Anyone can join in. In the old world, the technology leadership meant that the US was years ahead of the competition. No more.

Read more …

They should have arrived as I write this. Wonder what they talk about 🙂

Russian Delegation Will Be Waiting For Ukrainians In Istanbul – Kremlin (RT)

Moscow will be sending a delegation for direct talks with Ukraine in Istanbul on Thursday and expects Kiev to do the same, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev to find a lasting settlement to the conflict between the two countries. After his proposal was supported by US President Donald Trump, Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky, who had previously ruled out any talks with Moscow, also expressed his readiness. Kiev earlier stated that the only official Zelensky would talk to is Putin. The Russian president has so far made no indication that he is planning to travel to Istanbul.

When asked by journalists on Wednesday if the talks in Türkiye were still on the cards, Peskov replied by saying: “Indeed, the Russian delegation will be waiting for the Ukrainian delegation in Istanbul on Thursday, May 15, that is – tomorrow.” “I can confirm once again that everything that the president said in his statement on May 11… remains relevant,” he stressed. Peskov declined to reveal the lineup of the Russian delegation that will travel to Istanbul. It will be announced “when we receive instructions from the president. So far, there have been no such instructions,” he explained.

On Tuesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said that, during potential talks, Moscow wants to discuss “a sustainable settlement of the situation, first of all, by addressing the very roots of this conflict, resolving issues related to the denazification of the Kiev regime, ensuring recognition of the realities that have developed recently, including the entry of new territories into Russia.” Ryabkov refrained from making any forecasts on the outcome of discussions, but stressed that Moscow is committed to negotiating “seriously and responsibly.”

Read more …

“The Ukrainian Constitution bars elections during wartime and requires that presidential authority pass to the speaker of parliament if no legal successor is chosen..”

Zelensky Claims Ban On Russia Talks Doesn’t Apply To Him (RT)

Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has claimed that a law he signed banning negotiations with Russia does not apply to him personally, after calling for a direct meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Zelensky intends to travel to Türkiye later this week, where direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine are expected to resume for the first time since Kiev suspended talks in 2022. He has insisted that Putin must attend the talks in person to prove that Moscow has a genuine interest in peace. Speaking at a press conference on Tuesday, Zelensky rejected claims that his outreach contradicts Ukrainian law. A September 2022 decree, endorsed by Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council and signed by Zelensky, prohibits negotiations with Russia while Putin remains in office. The law was introduced as Kiev pursued a military victory in the conflict.

”It’s a Russian narrative that I cannot speak with Putin,” Zelensky said. “Nobody but me can conduct negotiations on sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, on our course.” Zelensky claimed in January that the ban was intended to prevent unauthorized negotiations by other Ukrainian officials, particularly to curb separatist influences and “shadow” negotiation channels. Russian officials have pointed to the law as evidence that Kiev is unwilling to engage diplomatically. The Ukrainian Constitution bars elections during wartime and requires that presidential authority pass to the speaker of parliament if no legal successor is chosen. Zelensky’s presidential term expired last year, yet he remains in power, dismissing opponents as Kremlin sympathizers for questioning his legitimacy.

Moscow has described Zelensky’s political status as an internal Ukrainian matter but cautioned that any treaties he signs could be challenged for lacking legitimacy. US President Donald Trump, whose administration has offered to broker a peace deal between Kiev and Moscow, has described Zelensky as “a dictator without elections.” The US has conducted multiple rounds of talks with Moscow and Kiev, promoting trust-building measures such as a 30-day moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure. Russia says its forces adhered fully to the plan, while accusing Ukraine of violating the partial ceasefire multiple times. US officials have called direct talks the next logical step in the Ukraine peace process. Senior American negotiators will reportedly observe the meeting in Istanbul. Kiev has urged its Western supporters to impose additional sanctions on Russia, should Putin decline to attend. Moscow has yet to confirm its delegation.

Read more …

Interesting view.

“..should a peace accord be reached during the negotiations, “I don’t know how long the Zelensky regime will [last]. It may fall apart.”

Zelensky’s Regime Only Stable When At War – Former Senior UN Official (RT)

Vladimir Zelensky’s regime enjoys relative stability only because of the conflict with Russia, and so may be reluctant to seal a peace agreement with Moscow, former director-general of the United Nations Office at Geneva, Sergey Ordzhonikidze, has told RT. The untrustworthiness of the Ukrainian leadership will loom large for the Russian delegation during an expected meeting in Istanbul, Türkiye, on Thursday, the veteran diplomat predicted on Tuesday. The talks were originally proposed last week by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who offered to resume direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev without any preconditions to reach a lasting settlement to the Ukraine conflict.

Zelensky has expressed his readiness to engage in dialogue with the Russian side, but has insisted that it be preceded by an unconditional 30-day ceasefire – a demand Moscow has repeatedly rejected. Zelensky has also said that he would only come to the meeting in Istanbul if Putin attends in person. Ordzhonikidze told RT that should a peace accord be reached during the negotiations, “I don’t know how long the Zelensky regime will [last]. It may fall apart.” “He obviously will have many internal problems because… he has some Nazi, fascist organizations that would [convict] him of betrayal,” he predicted, claiming that “it’s not a stable regime in the sense that it can be stable only during war.” The seasoned Russian diplomat also predicted that once Western leaders see Zelensky as a liability, they will get rid of him without a second thought.

History shows that months and in some cases even years of “homework” have underpinned successful negotiations. While overnight breakthroughs have also happened, much is determined by the level of trust between the parties concerned, Ordzhonikidze stressed. Ukrainian authorities have a poor track record in this respect, he told RT, citing the 2014-2015 Minsk agreements, which were supposed to grant Donetsk and Lugansk regions special status within the Ukrainian state, but were never implemented. ”Obviously, we need a country that would act like a… guarantor of the… possible agreement, if any at all,” Ordzhonikidze stated, noting that even if some nation, most likely the US, assumes the role, there is not much room for optimism as to whether Kiev would honor any agreement.

Read more …

“The first direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in more than three years..”

Rubio and Witkoff Will Travel To Istanbul On Friday – Reuters (RT)

US President Donald Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff has said he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio will travel to Istanbul on Friday, according to Reuters. Earlier this week, Trump announced that US officials would take part in the upcoming talks on the Ukraine conflict. The first direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine in more than three years are set to take place in the Turkish city on May 15. On Sunday, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume dialogue to find a lasting settlement to the ongoing conflict that would address its root causes. Witkoff made the remarks on Wednesday while speaking to reporters in Doha, where he and Rubio are accompanying Trump on a state visit to Qatar as part of a broader Middle East trip.

Trump said on Tuesday that Rubio and other US officials would join the talks in Istanbul. A White House spokesman later clarified to reporters that Rubio, Witkoff and US Special Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg would attend the negotiations. Trump, who had previously suggested he might attend in person, told reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Qatar that his schedule would not allow it. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Moscow would be sending a delegation and expected Ukraine to do the same. Kiev stated previously that Vladimir Zelensky would only talk directly to the Russian president. On Wednesday evening, the Kremlin named its delegation for the talks, to be led by presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, who also headed the Russian side during negotiations in Istanbul in 2022.

Read more …

Kellogg’s an fool. Dump him. “Russia has rejected the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form..” And look at what Kellogg talks about: NATO troops in Ukraine. He’s like the anti-Witkoff.

Trump Envoy Kellogg Reveals NATO Troop Deployment Plans For Ukraine (RT)

Washington is in talks with its European NATO allies about deploying military contingents to Ukraine as part of a possible post-conflict settlement, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, has said. A group of European NATO member states has for months been seeking to muster a force to be deployed to Ukraine as part of a so-called “coalition of the willing,” purportedly in a post-conflict peacekeeping role. Russia has repeatedly warned it would treat any foreign troops on Ukrainian soil as legitimate targets, saying such a move could escalate the conflict. Speaking to Fox Business on Tuesday, Kellogg said troops from France, Germany, the UK, and Poland could be part of what he described as a “resiliency force.” “This is a force referred to as the E3, but it’s actually now the E4 – when you include the Brits, the French, and the Germans, and in fact, the Poles as well,” he said.

Kellogg added the troops would be positioned west of the Dnieper River, placing them “outside the contact zone.” “And then to the east you have a peacekeeping force, and what it would look like with a third party involved with that. So, you can actually monitor a ceasefire; we have this thing pretty well planned out,” he said. The remarks come as preparations are underway for possible direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul. Kellogg and Steve Witkoff, another senior envoy for US President Donald Trump, are reportedly expected to attend. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday proposed conducting negotiations without preconditions in Türkiye on May 15. Vladimir Zelensky said he was ready to meet Putin on Thursday, but insisted that any talks should be preceded by the start of a 30-day ceasefire.

Moscow has repeatedly ruled out this suggestion, saying such a pause would give Kiev an opportunity to regroup militarily and renew hostilities. On Monday, the foreign ministers of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the UK, along with the EU’s top diplomat Kaja Kallas, issued a joint statement after talks in London. They pledged “robust security guarantees for Ukraine,” including “exploring the creation of a coalition of air, land, and maritime reassurance forces that could help create confidence in any future peace and support the regeneration of Ukraine’s armed forces.” Russia has rejected the presence of NATO troops in Ukraine in any form. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said it would pose a direct threat to Russia. Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu has warned it could trigger World War III, potentially involving nuclear weapons.

Read more …

He has no business there at all.

US Opposes Zelensky Attendance At NATO Summit (RT)

The US is against inviting Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky to the NATO summit in The Hague next month, Italy’s ANSA news agency reported on Wednesday, citing anonymous diplomatic sources. Kiev has long sought membership in the US-led military bloc – something Russia considers a fundamental threat to its national security. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly described the prevention of such a scenario as one of Moscow’s top objectives in the Ukraine conflict. Since assuming office in January, US President Donald Trump has on multiple occasions ruled out Ukraine’s accession to NATO in the foreseeable future. In its article, ANSA reported that “for now… a NATO-Ukraine Council at the level of leaders is not planned,” adding, however, that no final decision has been made yet.

According to the publication, Kiev could participate in some of the meetings on June 24-25, but only at the level of foreign and defense ministers. The Italian outlet reported that for the time being the only non-member states that have received invitations are Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. ANSA also reported that “at the moment, a very concise program is expected at the summit, in contrast to what has happened in recent years, to avoid possible friction with Donald Trump.” Zelensky joined NATO leaders for sessions of the NATO-Ukraine Council at the 2023 Vilnius Summit and the 2024 Washington Summit.

Also on Wednesday, Bloomberg quoted unnamed diplomats familiar with the matter as saying that membership for Ukraine will not be on the agenda during the upcoming gathering in the Netherlands, with the main focus expected to be on ramping up defense spending. The outlet similarly reported that the NATO summit in June will likely be shorter than the previous meetings.Speaking during a press conference last Friday, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stated that “we never agreed that, as part of a peace deal, there would be guaranteed NATO membership for Ukraine.” He emphasized that Ukraine’s accession to the bloc had been agreed upon by its members, but “for the longer term, not for the peace negotiations ongoing at the moment.” Rutte noted, however, that NATO maintains close cooperation with Kiev with respect to military aid and personnel training.

Read more …

“Western Europe, once a central pillar of global diplomacy, appears to be in the final phase of its strategic decline – a region now better known for procedure than power.”

The Unraveling of The Old World Order And The Role of Russia (Bordachev)

The day is not far off when the very notion of “international order” will lose its former meaning – just as happened with the once-theoretical concept of “multipolarity.” Originally conceived in the mid-20th century as a way to balance power among great states, multipolarity now bears little resemblance to what its originators had in mind. The same is increasingly true of international order. In recent years, it has become commonplace to say that the global balance of power is shifting and that previous leaders are no longer able to maintain their dominant positions. This much is obvious. No group of states today is capable of enforcing its vision of justice or order upon the rest of the world. Traditional international institutions are weakening, and their functions are being re-evaluated or hollowed out. Western Europe, once a central pillar of global diplomacy, appears to be in the final phase of its strategic decline – a region now better known for procedure than power.

But before we join the chorus, lamenting or celebrating the end of one era and the start of another, it is worth asking: what exactly is “international order”? Too often, this concept is treated as a given, when in fact it has always been a tool – one used primarily by states with both the means and the will to coerce others into accepting certain rules of the game. Historically, “international order” has been imposed by dominant powers capable of enforcing it. But today, emerging players outside the Western sphere – nations like China and India – may not be particularly interested in taking up that role. Why should they invest their resources in a vague, abstract idea that primarily served the interests of others?

The second traditional purpose of international order has been to prevent revolutionary upheaval. In the current strategic environment, this function is largely fulfilled not by institutions or diplomacy but by the simple fact of mutual nuclear deterrence. The handful of states with major nuclear capabilities – Russia, the United States, China, and a few others – are enough to keep general war at bay. No other powers are capable of truly challenging them in an existential way. For better or worse, that is what guarantees relative global stability.It is therefore naive to expect new great powers to be enthusiastic participants in building a new international order in the traditional sense. All past orders, including the current UN-centered one, emerged from intra-Western conflicts. Russia, while not a Western country in the cultural or institutional sense, played a decisive role in those conflicts – especially the Second World War – and was central to the global architecture that followed.

In fact, one could argue that the current international order, such as it is, was a product of Russia’s intervention in a Western civil war. It’s no coincidence that at the 1815 Congress of Vienna, Tsar Alexander I behaved not as one of many European leaders, but as a figure set apart – an “arbiter of Europe.” Russia has always seen itself this way: too large, too sovereign, and too independent to be just another node in someone else’s system. This is a key distinction. For Russia, participation in international order has never been an end in itself, but a means to preserve its own unique position in world affairs. That is something it has pursued with remarkable persistence for over two centuries.

Read more …

“..Russia has a far more productive engagement with many countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America than with most in Europe.”

Russia Doesn’t Need Western Approval To Shape Global History (Lukyanov)

The 9th of May Victory Day celebrations in Moscow once again captured international attention – despite the many other global events vying for the headlines. This wasn’t simply about pageantry or military symbolism. The Red Square parade was, as always, a statement: a public expression of one country’s position in the evolving global environment. Whether critics will admit it or not, events like this provoke reactions – and that in itself signals relevance. Eighty years after the end of the Second World War, the memory of that conflict is being viewed through new lenses. It was, undeniably, a world war – its consequences reshaped the international order. The creation of the United Nations was its most formal legacy, but the broader historical impact extended far beyond. The war marked the beginning of the end for the colonial system.

From the late 1940s onward, decolonization accelerated rapidly. Within three decades, colonial empires had all but disappeared, and dozens of new states emerged across Africa, Asia, and elsewhere. Their paths varied, but they fundamentally changed the structure of global politics. Looking back from 2025, one could argue that this wave of decolonization – driven by the global South – was no less historically important than the Cold War or the bipolar superpower confrontation. Today, the role of the so-called “global majority” is expanding quickly. These nations may not dominate the international system, but they increasingly form a vibrant, influential environment in which all global actors must operate. The presence of guests from Asia, Africa, and Latin America at this year’s parade in Moscow was a symbolic confirmation of that shift.

It signaled that the world has definitively moved beyond the Cold War structure, which framed international life around a North Atlantic-centric axis. Equally important was the fact that this reconfiguration was highlighted in Moscow – through Russia’s own initiative. It reflected not just commemoration, but transformation. A similar event is expected in Beijing in September to mark the end of the war in the Pacific theater. Together, these ceremonies highlight how the geopolitical center of gravity is gradually shifting away from its traditional Western base. As time distances us from the largest war in human history, its meaning doesn’t diminish. On the contrary, it reappears in new forms. Like it or not, memory has become a political force. It increasingly defines which community a country belongs to. Each nation has its own version of the war – and that’s to be expected. This isn’t revisionism. It’s the natural result of different historical experiences shaped under different conditions.

There will never be a single unified narrative of the past, and attempts to impose one are not only unrealistic but dangerous. The focus should be on finding compatibility between differing interpretations, not enforcing uniformity. Using memory as a political weapon erodes the foundations of peaceful international coexistence. This issue is particularly relevant for the global majority, which may one day voice its own historical claims more loudly – especially against former colonial powers in the West. In this context, the growing divergence between Russia and Western Europe over the legacy of the Second World War cannot be ignored. Efforts to preserve and defend Russia’s interpretation of the conflict are vital – not to convince others, but for domestic coherence and national identity. Other countries will write their own histories, shaped by their own interests. That cannot be controlled from the outside. The real issue is whether differing historical narratives can coexist. And on this front, it turns out that Russia has a far more productive engagement with many countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America than with most in Europe.

Read more …

“Just two-months ago, Ahmad al-Sharaa remained designated as an al-Qaeda terrorist by the United States Government, there was a $10 million-dollar bounty on his head. Yesterday, as Syria’s interim President, Ammad al-Sharaa shook hands with President Donald Trump in Saudi Arabia.”

Trump Shocks the World – Again (Spencer)

Trump has done it again. That much is clear. He has outmaneuvered and out-thought everyone else, and did what many others assumed to be impossible. But what exactly has he done? On Wednesday morning, during his trip to Saudi Arabia, Trump met with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, who from 2017 until January of this year, was known as Abu Mohammad al-Julani. Al-Sharaa was the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the “Syrian Liberation Group,” a Sunni jihad group that had been linked to al-Qaeda and was working to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In January 2025, HTS finally attained its goal. Assad fled to Russia. Al-Julani took control in Damascus and announced that he was establishing a regime that would respect the rights of all Syrians. He insisted that he had broken with al-Qaeda years before, and to signify that he was a new man, he shed his nom de guerre and reverted to his birth name. He trimmed his beard, took off his fatigues, and donned a suit.

Yet almost immediately, al-Sharaa’s attempts to construct a new image for himself foundered upon harsh reality. His forces were involved in mass killings of members of the Alawite sect. Since Bashar Assad was an Alawite, this sect was associated with the old regime. As recently as March 7, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared that al-Sharaa was behind it: “Al-Julani took off his galabiya, put on a suit, and presented a moderate facade. Now, he has removed the mask, revealing his true face: a jihadist terrorist from the Al-Qaeda school, committing atrocities against the Alawite civilian population.” Al-Sharaa, however, condemned the killings and vowed to punish those responsible, even if they were his own men, saying: “Syria is a state of law. The law will take its course on all. We fought to defend the oppressed, and we won’t accept that any blood be shed unjustly, or goes without punishment or accountability, even among those closest to us.”

How since is al-Sharaa? Is he still a jihadist, practicing Muhammad’s dictum, “War is deceit”? Or does he genuinely wish to establish a regime in Syria that will ensure the rights of all people? Donald Trump is giving him a chance to put up or shut up. Trump made it clear throughout the 2024 presidential campaign: he was determined to end the cycle of endless wars and establish a new era of peace. He repeatedly made it clear that this would involve challenging what the foreign policy establishment has long held to be unquestionable truths, and finding new ways to reach accords with previously hostile entities based on common interests. In many ways, Trump’s meeting with al-Sharaa is as momentous, and could be more momentous, than his first-term overtures to Kim Jong Un. The two meetings come from the same wellsprings: Trump is attempting to break longstanding logjams and end the status quo that the foreign policy establishment, both inside the U.S. and elsewhere, had come to take for granted.

NBC News reported Wednesday that Trump announced: “We are currently exploring normalizing relations with Syria’s new government, as you know, beginning with my meeting with President Ahmed al-Sharaa.” Yet he is not proceeding without asking certain things of al-Sharaa as well. NBC reported that he “encouraged Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa to recognize Israel’s statehood.”Trump explained to al-Sharaa that he had “a tremendous opportunity to do something historic in his country.” The president “urged the Syrian leader to sign on to the Abraham Accords.” He “also advised Sharaa to tell foreign terrorists to leave Syria, deport Palestinian terrorists, help the U.S. prevent the resurgence of the Islamic State and assume responsibility for Islamic State detention centers in Syria’s northeast.” Trump declared that he wanted to give Syria “a chance at greatness.”

So Trump wants to make peace with old foes based on mutual economic interests. He is giving al-Sharaa a chance to demonstrate that he really is no longer a jihadi and wants to build a stable and prosperous Syria. It could happen. The global jihad, although it is ignored everywhere, continues nevertheless. It never goes away. Individuals and states, however, can and do put it aside for considerable periods in order to pursue other interests. A reminder of how difficult this will be, however, came in the fact that, as NBC noted, “Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was also present and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan joined by phone.” The presence of Erdogan on the phone was a reminder that al-Sharaa has been propped up by Turkish forces, and that many see his forces in Syria as a tool of Erdogan’s interests in restoring the Ottoman caliphate.

This is a matter Trump may well have to deal with before too long. Whether or not al-Sharaa is sincere in renouncing jihad, Erdogan seems to be moving in the opposite direction. Nevertheless, Trump’s attempt to create peace based on common interests and move beyond the present logjam is as welcome as it is audacious. Once again, Trump appears to be way ahead of everyone else, as he was when he established the Abraham Accords even as John Kerry was confidently telling the world that such a thing was impossible. The establishment will howl at Trump’s meeting; that’s only to be expected. The president, meanwhile, is moving ahead with astonishing vision, immense confidence, and considerable imagination. The peace and stability of the Middle East, and of the entire world, are riding upon his success.

Read more …

Orders: $200 billion. Qatar GDP: $200 billion. “Qatar and the US also signed a commitment to generating $1.2 trillion worth of economic exchange..”

Qatar Commits To “Largest Order Of Jets In The History Of Boeing” (NYP)

President Trump announced Wednesday that the Qatari government had committed to the “largest order of jets in the history of Boeing” — touting the transaction despite trashing the American company earlier this week for its slowness in delivering a new Air Force One. Trump said the oil and gas-rich monarchy, which has offered to provide the US president with a luxury “palace on wings,” committed to spending $160 billion on the planes as part of a broader $243.5 billion economic pledge. “We’re going to see some of it in action tomorrow…. it’s going to be an air fair,” Trump said during a meeting with the country’s leaders shortly after he arrived in the ultramodern capital on the shores of the Persian Gulf. Wednesday evening, at a state dinner in Trump’s honor, the president said that the investments could ultimately generate $1.2 trillion in economic activity.

“Working together, we can help the entire region unlock its potential,” Trump told his host, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. “You have unbelievable potential here, such great, such rich land, such beautiful, magnificent — it’s just a magnificent place, and you’re unlocking its potential.” Moments earlier, the emir had said Trump’s decision to visit Qatar on the first major overseas trip of his second term “was no mystery.” “Yes, the United States is a superpower, boosting the largest economy and military force in history,” al-Thani said. “Meanwhile, Qatar is one of the smallest countries with one of the smallest populations, and as the Americans in the room know, DC is almost 7,000 miles away from here, but my friends, small nations have their own superpowers, resilience, nimbleness, and we are a powerful agent for peace precisely because of our size.”

A White House fact sheet describing the new business deals said that “Boeing and GE Aerospace secured a landmark order from Qatar Airways, a $96 billion agreement to acquire up to 210 American-made Boeing 787 Dreamliner and 777X aircraft powered by GE Aerospace engines.” The release described the transaction as “Boeing’s largest-ever widebody order and largest-ever 787 order. This historic agreement will support 154,000 U.S. jobs annually, totaling over 1 million jobs in the United States during the course of production and delivery of this deal.” The reason for the discrepancy between the topline plane-sale figures cited by Trump and the fact sheet was not immediately clear. Trump hailed what he called a “very special relationship” with Qatar, even likening one royal to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, calling both men “tall handsome guys.”

Qatar, which hosts more than 10,000 US military forces at Al Udeid Air Base just outside Doha, has forged a close relationship with Trump dating to his first term, when American advisers helped broker a deal to end a Saudi-led blockade of the peninsular nation. Qatar has offered to give Trump a luxuriously upgraded Boeing 747-8 worth an estimated $400 million, drawing bipartisan pushback. That jet, currently parked in the US, won’t be presented during the visit, the White House says. Trump has repeatedly defended the proposed transaction, telling Fox News host Sean Hannity in an interview that aired Tuesday night: “We’re the United States of America – I believe that we should have the most impressive plane.” “Some people say, ‘Oh, you shouldn’t accept gifts for the country.’ My attitude is, why wouldn’t I accept a gift?” the president added. “We’re giving to everybody else, why wouldn’t I accept a gift? Because it’s going to be a couple of years, I think, before the Boeings are finished.”

On Monday, Trump told reporters at the White House that he was “very disappointed” in the timetable for the delivery of two US-made jets, currently set for 2027 and 2028. “They’re way behind,” he said. “They were way behind, another mess that I inherited from Biden, and it’s going to be a while before we get them.” Qatar and the US also signed a commitment to generating $1.2 trillion worth of economic exchange in the years to come, without specifying details. Massachusetts-based Raytheon will receive $1 billion from Doha for access to the company’s counter-drone capabilities, making Qatar the first in the world to obtain Raytheon’s Fixed Site – Low, Slow, Small Unmanned Aerial System Integrated Defeat System (FS-LIDS), dedicated to attacking unmanned aircraft.

Qatar will also pay San Diego-based General Atomics nearly $2 billion deal to acquire the company’s MQ-9B remotely piloted aircraft system. The two countries also outlined future potential security deals amounting to $38 billion, according to a White House readout.“These new agreements and instruments aim to drive the growth of the U.S.-Qatar bilateral commercial relationship, create thousands of well-paying jobs, and open new trade and investment opportunities for both countries over the coming decade and beyond,” the administration said. On Tuesday, Trump signed deals securing $600 billion worth of investments with Saudi Arabia — with more agreements expected when the president visits the UAE for the final stop of his trip.

Read more …

“The anti-Trump economic narratives haven’t just failed; they’ve completely collapsed.”

Every Anti-Trump Economic Narrative Is Collapsing (Margolis)

Remember how the liberal media and Democrats warned that Donald Trump’s economic policies would bring about financial armageddon? How many times have they been proven wrong? I haven’t been keeping track, but they’ve been proven wrong once again. This shouldn’t surprise anyone. When Trump was president from 2017 to 2021, we experienced one of the strongest economies in our nation’s history until COVID hit. The liberal media spent four years trying to convince us that Barack Obama deserved credit for Trump’s economic success, and then it spent the last three years insisting that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris deserved credit for the post-COVID recovery. The media’s latest effort was to convince the public that Trump’s tariffs were going to cause prices to soar and send us into a recession. Even the liberal media has had to admit that that just ain’t happening.

“Prices climbed at an unexpectedly slow pace last month, offering a boost to President Donald Trump, whose aggressive trade policies have sparked fears of a resurgence in inflation,” Politico reported on Tuesday. “The Labor Department on Tuesday reported that prices rose at an annual rate of 2.3 percent, the smallest increase since early 2021. While price growth in so-called core sectors of the economy — which exclude volatile food and energy costs — remained elevated at 2.8 percent, April’s Consumer Price Index contained only scant evidence that Trump’s tariffs have meaningfully driven up the cost of living.” Even though tariff rates have fallen since the administration negotiated a temporary détente with China, Fed Governor Adriana Kugler said Monday that the administration’s new taxes on imports are still “pretty high” and that she expects inflation to rise and growth to slow soon.

So far, that hasn’t happened. Few economists had expected that overall inflation surged last month. But there was broad anticipation that Trump’s levies on Chinese imports, steel and aluminum and certain Canadian and Mexican products had caused prices for apparel, electronics and other consumer goods to spike. If anything, the opposite occurred: The cost of clothing and new cars — two areas that were highly exposed to Trump’s initial levies — both fell. Similarly, inflation hit its lowest level since 2021. It certainly pained CNN to report that. And remember that recession experts told us was totally happening this year? JP Morgan is no longer predicting that it will happen. Of course, Politico was not only disappointed that the bad predictions of the Trump economy didn’t pan out, but it also lamented how this will embolden Trump.

“The CPI report will likely bolster the administration’s claims that grim forecasts for the economy have been overblown,” the paper groaned. The report will also amplify Trump’s calls for Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell to lower interest rates. Powell and other Fed policymakers have warned that the rapid escalation of import costs may soon cause consumer prices to spike and that the central bank needs to keep inflation at bay.n And many economists still expect inflation to rebound in the coming months. Analysts at Citi say they expect the personal consumption expenditures index — the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge — to climb by 3 percent by the end of the year. While that is less than their previous forecast for 3.5 percent inflation, it’s still well above the Fed’s annual target of 2 percent. The anti-Trump economic narratives haven’t just failed; they’ve completely collapsed.

Read more …

Trump just announced a tariff deal offer from India. The big ones first, the rest will follow.

Trump Economy Defies ‘Gloom And Doom’ Expectations (Whedon)

With April’s inflation report coming in below forecasts, the Trump economy appears to be defying analysts’ and politicians’ predictions of collapse in the wake of his “Liberation Day” tariffs and subsequent trade negotiations. As Trump adds more notches to his belt in deals with key trade partners, the stock market has rebounded to pre-tariff levels, even while many tariffs remain largely in place on major economies such as China and the UK. In April of this year, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the developments of Trump’s tariffs point to “a loss of confidence in U.S. economic policy” and called the tariffs “the worst self-inflicted policy wound I’ve ever seen in my career inflicted on our economy […] they are “doing immense damage.” Trump, on April 2, announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs on nearly every nation, imposing a “reciprocal” rate calibrated to address the American trade deficit with each nation.

The tariffs far exceeded what analysts had expected, and the stock market was sent reeling for days. Trump himself reshared a video suggesting that he deliberately crashed the market to force an interest rate cut to allow the government to refinance its debt at a lower rate. Bond markets bucked at the move and Trump ultimately announced a 90-day pause on most tariffs to pursue trade agreements, though he left in place a 10% baseline and kept China’s above 100%. Markets gradually recovered, and major indices have since exceeded their April 1 closes. Boosting some of that movement have been trade deals with the United Kingdom and China, two of the biggest American trading partners. Both deals resulted in lower import tariffs on American goods and higher import tariffs on goods from those nations, marking net gains for the U.S. in Trump’s bid to rebalance trade.

Read together, multiple indicators suggest that the Trump economy defied expectations and that the trade policies did not adversely damage the nation’s overall economic health. If the trend continues, Trump will have fulfilled what politicians call “dinner table” issues for millions of Americans. Inflation fell to an annualized rate of 2.3% in April, down from the March figure of 2.4%. Analysts had expected it to hold steady. January’s inflation rate stood at 3.0%, and the figure has marked a steady decline since Trump took office. Inflation reached a high of 9.1% in July 2022 in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the issue was a leading factor in driving down President Joe Biden’s approval rating in subsequent years. Trump campaigned extensively on the issue, saying he would bring inflation down through energy production.

[..] After more than a month of negotiations, Trump confirmed last week that he had reached an agreement on trade with the United Kingdom, marking the first substantive deal since Liberation Day. “The agreement with the United Kingdom is a full and comprehensive one that will cement the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom for many years to come,” Trump said on Truth Social ahead of the formal agreement. The agreement left in place the 10% reciprocal tariff and subjected imported vehicles from the UK to a 25% tariff after the first 100,000. In 2024, UK automakers only exported 106,000 cars to the United States. In turn, the UK lowered its tariff rates on U.S. goods from 5.1% to 1.8%. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer made a phone cameo at the announcement, saying “there are no two countries that are closer than our two countries that now we take this into new and important territory by adding trade and the economy to the closeness of our relationship.”

The most aggressive — and widely reported — trade standoff came with China, as Trump left high tariffs in place even as he paused those on most other nations for 90 days. Boosting market sentiment, this week Beijing and Washington reached an agreement to substantially lower their tariffs, with the U.S. setting its rate at 30% for imported Chinese goods and the Chinese dropping theirs to 10%. “This initiative aligns with the expectations of producers and consumers in both countries and serves the interests of both nations as well as the common interests of the world,” the Chinese Commerce Ministry said in a statement republished by PBS. PBS added that “The ministry called the agreement an important step for the resolution of the two countries’ differences and said it lays the foundation for further cooperation.”

“The consensus from both delegations this weekend is neither side wants a decoupling,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said at the time. “And what had occurred with these very high tariffs … was an embargo, the equivalent of an embargo. And neither side wants that. We do want trade.” Trump on Tuesday signed an agreement with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and secured $600 billion in investment pledges during his trip to that nation. Another possible indicator of economic vibrancy is the pace of U.S. vacation travel. The American Automobile Association (AAA) this year expects a record 45.1 million Americans to travel for Memorial Day, according to a press release. The organization also predicted a 2% hike in air travel over the weekend.

Since January 2025, the U.S. economy has also steadily added jobs, including a gain of 143,000 in January and 177,000 in April. The unemployment rate has remained steady at 4.2%, with the Department of Labor reporting that the economy added 177,000 jobs in defiance of expectations. In March, the economy added 228,000 jobs. Bloomberg News reported that JPMorgan Chase & Co. on Tuesday dropped its recession call for 2025, saying “[t]he administration’s recent dialing down of some of the more draconian tariffs placed on China should reduce the risk that the US economy slips into recession this year.” JPMorgan’s Chief US Economist Michael Feroli was optimistic but guarded, saying “We believe recession risks are still elevated, but now below 50%.”

Read more …

21 days’ notice, in English and Spanish. For gang members?

Federal Judge Says Trump’s Invocation of Alien Enemies Act Was Legal (ET)

A federal judge in Pennsylvania has ruled that President Donald Trump validly invoked the Alien Enemies Act in March as part of an effort to deport Venezuelan gang members. More specifically, U.S. District Judge Stephanie Haines held that the gang—Tren de Aragua (TdA)—was engaging in the type of “predatory incursion” that the Alien Enemies Act mentions. In an opinion issued on May 13, Haines noted that TdA has been designated a foreign terrorist organization. That designation, she said, “heavily supports the conclusions … that TdA is a cohesive group united by a common goal of causing significant disruption to the public safety of the United States.”Three other district court judges have ruled against the Trump administration, finding that a proclamation Trump issued in March misapplied the law. Each of those judges disagreed with Trump’s description of TdA as engaging in an invasion or predatory incursion.

Trump invoked the law in March, stating that TdA gang members had infiltrated the Venezuelan regime and invaded the United States, justifying their expedited removal. “Evidence irrefutably demonstrates that TdA has invaded the United States and continues to invade, attempt to invade, and threaten to invade the country; perpetrated irregular warfare within the country; and used drug trafficking as a weapon against our citizens,” Trump’s March 15 proclamation reads. In a federal court in New York City, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein disagreed. On May 6, he found that TdA members “do not seek to occupy territory, to oust American jurisdiction from any territory, or to ravage territory. “In April, the Supreme Court intervened twice in related cases, but without ruling on whether the administration had properly invoked the Alien Enemies Act.

Instead, it halted some deportations in a brief order on April 19, and told the administration on April 7 that it must provide suspected gang members with notice that they are subject to removal, as well as an opportunity to challenge their detention. It specified that “the notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief,” which is a legal avenue for challenging one’s detention. Haines also issued an order on May 13 that stated the administration had provided insufficient notice to detainees. She said that the administration couldn’t remove a Venezuelan national who had brought the lawsuit in Pennsylvania unless it provided 21 days’ notice, among other things. Her order also required that the notice be provided in English and Spanish.

Read more …

Too complex for senators and congress(wo)men.

Average Americans Poised for Double-Digit Tax Cuts In 2027 (ZH)

A sweeping Republican tax overhaul proposal, estimated to deliver double-digit percentage reductions in tax bills for average-income Americans, is drawing mounting opposition in the Senate over its accompanying cuts to health care and clean energy programs – underscoring the internal divisions complicating Republican efforts to advance a unified economic agenda. According to a new analysis from the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), households earning between $30,000 and $80,000 would see their federal taxes drop by approximately 15 percent in 2027 under the House GOP plan. Americans earning between $15,000 and $30,000 would see an even steeper 21 percent decline – at least initially. But those same low-income earners would see their tax bills rise sharply in later years unless extended, with increases of 12 percent in 2029 and 20 percent in 2030, the JCT found.

The report attributed some of those changes to proposed reforms of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), a benefit for low-income workers that Republicans argue is vulnerable to improper payments. While the report’s topline numbers have fueled Republican claims that the proposal is middle-class focused, Democrats seized on the overall distribution of tax cuts in dollar terms, Politico reports. Taxpayers earning more than $500,000 are slated to receive an aggregate cut of about $170 billion in 2027 – nearly triple the $59 billion going to households earning $30,000 to $80,000. The proposal has already provoked heated exchanges in the House Ways and Means Committee, where lawmakers debated the fairness and sustainability of the tax package. Democrats derided the bill as a boon to the wealthy, while Republicans pointed to new breaks for tips, overtime, and seniors as evidence of its broader appeal.

The report is not a complete picture of winners and losers under Republicans’ plans. It doesn’t include a potential deal among lawmakers to further increase the SALT cap, beyond a proposed $30,000 limit. The report also only looks at the tax side of Republican plans, and does not account for changes in spending programs, like Medicaid. -Politico. “It’s a trick,” said Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI). “You do it temporarily so you can get through the 2026 election” and “then these benefits for children and elders and workers disappear, while the tax benefits for the ultra-wealthy soar.” Yet beyond the debate over tax cuts, the House plan is facing stiff resistance in the Senate for how it proposes to offset some of the revenue losses: by slashing Medicaid and rolling back key clean energy incentives passed under the Biden administration.

A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate found that the House bill’s Medicaid reforms could result in 8.6 million people losing health care coverage, largely due to new work requirements, cost-sharing mandates, and restrictions on how states finance their Medicaid programs. Several Senate Republicans voiced concern over the health care implications, especially for rural areas. “These are working people in particular who are going to have to pay more,” said Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO), referring to new cost-sharing rules. He warned that changes to provider taxes – which states use to draw federal Medicaid dollars – could reduce coverage in his state and strain rural hospitals. “I continue to maintain my position we should not be cutting Medicaid benefits,” Hawley said. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), said the proposed treatment of provider taxes “would be very harmful to Maine’s hospitals,” echoing concerns raised by other senators from rural and Medicaid-reliant states.

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), also pointed to the disproportionate burden that Medicaid cuts would place on states like hers, calling the issue a key sticking point in ongoing Senate discussions. In addition to health care, some senate Republicans are also wary of the House’s aggressive plans to unwind tax credits for clean energy and hydrogen development, incentives championed in the Inflation Reduction Act and credited with bringing manufacturing investments and jobs to red and purple states alike. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), who faces a competitive reelection race next year, expressed concern over quickly ending climate initiatives – suggesting that the House language on energy tax rollbacks would need to be revised. “You can’t shock the markets by doing it all at once,” Tillis said of the proposed clean energy phaseouts. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) also flagged potential impacts to her state’s clean hydrogen initiatives, saying she would review the House’s plan to eliminate the 45V hydrogen production credit, which could affect nearly $1 billion in planned federal support for the Appalachian Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub.

The House GOP plan is expected to pass narrowly along party lines, but Senate Republicans made clear this week that the legislation will require significant changes to win broader support in the upper chamber. “We are coordinating very closely with our House counterparts,” said Senate Minority Whip John Thune of South Dakota. “We know they have to get 218 votes… but it’s likely we’ll have a Senate substitute.” As Republican leaders try to reconcile competing priorities — delivering tax relief, restraining federal spending, and maintaining political support in swing states — the path forward for the legislation remains uncertain. “How we navigate this,” said Murkowski, “is something we’re all trying to wander through.”

Read more …

“The so-called “Pfizergate” decision comes as a major embarrassment for the EU chief..”

Like she cares. In reality, she’s now free to do it again.

Court Rules On Von Der Leyen’s Secret Covid Vaccine Deal Messages (RT)

The European Commission wrongly denied the media access to secret text messages between its president, Ursula von der Leyen, and the CEO of pharma giant Pfizer, exchanged during negotiations of a multi-billion dollar Covid-19 vaccine deal, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled on Wednesday. The so-called “Pfizergate” decision comes as a major embarrassment for the EU chief, who has responsibility for transparency and rule of law issues in the bloc. The case centers on a 2021 interview von der Leyen gave to the NYT in which she claimed she had been negotiating a deal for 900 million COVID vaccine shots with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla via sms messages. The NYT subsequently filed an access request for the messages, to which the EC claimed the texts, which have never been released, were not in its possession.

The court ruled that the EC “cannot merely state that it does not hold the requested documents but must provide credible explanations enabling the public and the Court to understand why those documents cannot be found.” It also criticized the Commission for failing to justify why the texts were not retained and to clarify how they were deleted. In response, the EC said it recognized the need for greater transparency and promised to issue a new decision with more detailed reasoning. It did not, however, commit to releasing the messages in question. The ruling can be appealed to the European Court of Justice. A similar CJEU judgment last July found that the EC lacked transparency in how it negotiated vaccine contracts with Pfizer and AstraZeneca. The deals, signed in 2020 and 2021 and worth approximately €2.7 billion ($3 billion), were shielded from disclosure to European Parliament members on the grounds of protecting commercial interests.

https://twitter.com/DD_Geopolitics/status/1922564484838609364

Read more …

Can’t make Trudy look bad!

Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Signed Oath to Conceal COVID Info (YN)

Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, and nearly 30 senior federal health officials signed a confidential oath during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, pledging not to release information that could “embarrass” the Trudeau cabinet, according to internal records obtained through Access to Information requests. The oath, revealed by Blacklock’s Reporter, was part of a broader secrecy policy within the Public Health Agency and other government departments including Health, Industry, Foreign Affairs, and National Defence. Internal communications from 2020 show that vaccine supply manager Alan Thom voiced concern about the widespread requirement for federal managers to sign non-disclosure agreements, noting, “at a certain point the Department of Public Works determined individual non-disclosure agreements were no longer needed… as we are all covered through our responsibilities as public servants.”

The confidentiality agreement emphasized that any “unauthorized disclosure of confidential information… may result in embarrassment, criticism or claims against Canada and may jeopardize Canada’s supplier relations and procurement processes.” Managers acknowledged their ongoing obligations under the Values And Ethics Code For The Public Sector, according to the documents. The oaths were signed shortly after the Trudeau administration secured billions in COVID-19 vaccine contracts with companies including Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Novavax, Johnson & Johnson, Medicago, and Sanofi. Dr. Tam, a longtime proponent of mass vaccination, oversaw public messaging during the rollout. The first mRNA vaccine to be approved in Canada was Pfizer’s BioNTech shot, authorized on December 9, 2020, followed closely by Moderna’s vaccine.

The approvals came after the Trudeau government granted vaccine manufacturers legal immunity from liability for adverse effects. Parliamentarians requesting to review those contracts were denied access. In response to growing reports of vaccine-related injuries, Canada launched its Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) in late 2020. As reported by LifeSiteNews, the program was created after legal protections were granted to pharmaceutical companies. A memo from Canada’s Department of Health now warns that VISP payouts are set to exceed the program’s original $75 million budget, prompting the federal government to allocate an additional $36 million. Despite dwindling public demand, the government continues to purchase new doses, even as its own statistics show widespread rejection of booster injections by Canadians. Compounding concerns, an inhalable mRNA vaccine—developed using fetal cell lines and funded by Ottawa—has now entered Phase 2 clinical trials.

Data from Statistics Canada also indicates that post-vaccine rollout, deaths attributed to COVID-19 and “unspecified causes” significantly increased, raising further questions about the long-term safety and effectiveness of the vaccine campaign. LifeSiteNews has compiled an extensive archive of research linking COVID mRNA injections to adverse events such as myocarditis, blood clots, and fertility issues. Additional findings highlight risks in children, while all currently available COVID shots have ties to abortion-derived fetal cell lines. With growing scrutiny over vaccine safety and government transparency, the revelation that Canada’s top public health officials signed agreements to avoid reputational harm to federal leadership adds another layer of controversy to the country’s pandemic response.

Oath

Read more …

“..European puppet leaders are planning to establish a “special tribunal” within the framework of the Council of Europe to judge Russia for “aggression” and other alleged crimes in Ukraine..”

A New False Tribunal Is In The Making (Stephen Karganovic)

Kaja Kallas’ delusional and laughably ill-timed announcement, made the day after Russia’s 9 May Victory Day triumph in Moscow, that European puppet leaders are planning to establish a “special tribunal” within the framework of the Council of Europe to judge Russia for “aggression” and other alleged crimes in Ukraine jogs some memories from the Hague. ICTY, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, is located there, as the new Tribunal Kallas has mentioned will also be. This writer had spent some of the most interesting years of his life there. An enduring memory is former Serbian and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, who was abducted by the vassal regime installed in his country after the October 2000 colour revolution and sent to the Hague to be put on trial. During his initial appearance in the courtroom, addressing the judges and Prosecutor Carla del Ponte, Milosevic referred to the court as a “false tribunal.”

That phrase stuck in my mind. Milosevic’s English was adequate, but it was not flawless. Hence the picturesque turn of phrase he used. Had he been more fluent in idiomatic English he would have called it a “phony” or “bogus” tribunal. Instead he translated what he meant to say directly from his native Serbian with a result that was more amusing than academically precise. But no harm was done. In fact, under the circumstances the glaringly unidiomatic locution made his profound point even stronger. Regrettably, Kaja Kallas has not disclosed technical details about the projected Tribunal which should be made available before the credibility of this venture can be properly assessed. There are several parameters that must be established before any such “court” can be taken seriously.

The first of these is a clear definition of the new judicial body’s mandate. It is not enough merely to say that it shall deal with war crimes and crimes against humanity arising from the conflict in the Ukraine since February 2022. Whose crimes will be the subject of the court’s investigation and ultimately judgment? Kallas’ rationale behind the creation of this court raises serious issues in that regard. She refers exclusively to “Russian crimes,” a reference also echoed by EU Commission President Ursula van den Leyen and EU Rule of Law Commissioner Michael McGrath. Has no one else been observed committing crimes in Ukraine during the period under consideration, or perhaps going back a bit further, to 2014? If there are any lingering doubts concerning this matter, which directly impacts the Tribunal’s objectivity, they were settled by the clarification on the European Commission posted on its website:

“The Tribunal will have the power to investigate, prosecute and try Russian political and military leaders, who bear the greatest responsibility for the crime of aggression against Ukraine.”

Read more …

 

 

 

 

Plandemic

Ed Dowd: If this is true in humans we have a potential gigantic demographic time bomb globally. Just halt the jabs and investigate.

https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/1922329204336541772

Florida

Party

Cats
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1922379741539017148

Owl

Otomati

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

May 142025
 


Marc Chagall Blue lovers 1914

 

China Sent Secret Delegation To Washington 3 Weeks Ago To Negotiate Deal (ZH)
Trump Not Going To Istanbul, Kremlin Downplays Direct Ukraine Peace Talks (ZH)
Trump’s Top Officials Going To Türkiye For Russia-Ukraine Talks – Reuters (RT)
Russia Continues To Prepare For May 15 Talks in Istanbul – Kremlin (Sp.)
Not Talking To Putin Illogical – Witkoff (RT)
How Our Country and Its History Were Stolen from Us (Donald Jeffries)
Trump Can Still Lead Without a Third Term (Victor Davis Hanson)
Trump Administration Is Exposing the Hubris of Institutional DEI (Stepman)
EU Investigating MEPs Over Moscow Visit – Lawmaker (RT)
Trump Torches Neocons, Emphasizes ‘Peace Through Strength’ Deal-Making (ZH)
Netanyahu Blasts Media ‘Spin’, Says Trump Ties ‘Excellent’ (Cradle)
Supreme Court Set to End Era of Nationwide Judicial Injunctions (Margolis)
Here’s the Truth About the Qatar Jumbo Jet Story (Margolis)
Labour and Tories are ‘Two Cheeks of the Same Backside’ – George Galloway (Sp.)
UK PM Starmer Mercilessly Dragged For Telling Immigrants To Speak English (MN)
US Pressure May Have Forced Germany To Drop Surveillance On AfD (RMX)
Donald Trump Helped Ancient Russians Defeat Space Lizards (RT)

 

 

 

 

RT’s editor in chief erases Kellogg, says he needs a holiday. She’s right.

Debt based

New
https://twitter.com/FriendOfRussia/status/1921829503132663987

MacG

Why Trump offers asylum to white South Africans.
https://twitter.com/realMaalouf/status/1922044936406323432

Imran
https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1922229596012921088

 

 

Macron, Merz, Starmer, Zelensky:
“Russia is desperate for a ceasefire”
… 5 minutes later…
“We suggest a 30 day unconditional ceasefire and we will continue to arm Ukraine in the meantime.”
… 5 minutes later …
“We demand that Russia accept the ceasefire”
… 5 minutes later …
“It’s Russia who is losing and is desperate to rearm.
… 5 minutes later …
“Why is Russia ignoring our ceasefire demand?”

 

 

 

 

“While Vowing It Would “Never Talk To Trump”.

China Sent Secret Delegation To Washington 3 Weeks Ago To Negotiate Deal (ZH)

Recall that on April 25 we reported something which no other US media outlet carried, namely that a “Chinese Delegation Spotted Entering Treasury Department” in a meeting shrouded in secrecy as China “Demanded All Photos Be Deleted.” Naturally, we suggested that this was an overture to China offering an olive branch to the Trump admin on US soil in hopes of reaching a trade deal, a speculation which the TDS-crowd fumed over. It turns out we were right, and as the FT writes, “the first meeting to break the US-China trade deadlock was held almost three weeks ago in the basement of the IMF headquarters, arranged under cover of secrecy.”

US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent, who was attending the IMF spring meetings in Washington, met China’s finance minister Lan Fo’an to discuss the near complete breakdown in trade between the world’s two biggest economies, according to people familiar with the matter. The previously unreported encounter was the first high-level meeting between US and Chinese officials since Donald Trump’s inauguration and the launch of his tariff war. The Treasury declined to comment on the secret meeting. The talks culminated this weekend in Geneva with Bessent and He Lifeng, China’s vice-premier, agreeing a ceasefire that would slash respective tariffs by 115 percentage points for 90 days. All of the above is correct, except that the encounter was “previously unreported” – we reported here first on April 25 that on April 24 the Chinese were seen entering the Treasury department under a shroud of secrecy. :

The date April 24 is interesting for another reason: that’s the day Chinese state media vowed that it would not engage in trade talks without complete tariff surrender, with Yahoo News reporting that “China Slams the Door on Trump: No Trade Talks Without Total Tariff Surrender.” …

and at the same time also lying that there are “no negotiations with the Trump administration over tariffs”: And yet, amid all this propaganda, Beijing was secretly negotiating with the US just a few hundred feet from the White House, and the outcome would be the Geneva tariff deal which sent stocks soaring…. although anyone who had read our report and had put on a bullish trade long ago, would have made an absolute killing. Then again, one didn’t need the FT to confirm what we first reported three weeks ago: we could just listen to Chuck Schumer’s latest installment in his endless tirade of lies, and flip it…

https://twitter.com/Jules31415/status/1922125798414147706?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1922125798414147706%7Ctwgr%5E9e8434e4e35c0c33b0b8d94eda5fe8670580952f%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fmarkets%2Faaaaand-its-gone

Read more …

Zelensky is in the way.

Trump Not Going To Istanbul, Kremlin Downplays Direct Ukraine Peace Talks (ZH)

The Kremlin on Tuesday affirmed that “the Russian side continues to prepare for the negotiations that are scheduled to take place on Thursday.” This after on Sunday Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to resume direct negotiations with Kiev, and proposed the Istanbul talks. Ukrainian President Zelensky then made a performative gesture – likely more meant to prove to the White House that he’s ‘willing’ – saying he’s ready to fly to Istanbul in person and urged Putin to do the same. Putin spokesman Dimitry Peskov when grilled by reporters on Tuesday downplayed the whole event, describing that direct talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul later this week are merely “still possible”. As for revealing the line-up for the Russian delegation, and who is expected lead, Peskov said “we will announce it as soon as the president [Putin] deems it necessary.”

Despite some sensational recent headlines and statements, one thing we can be sure will not happen is President Putin’s personal presence. And per the latest from Reuters, President Trump is not going to be there in Turkey either (after on Monday he actually floated the possibility). “All of us in Ukraine would appreciate it if President Trump could be there with us at this meeting in Turkey. This is the right idea. We can change a lot,” Zelensky had said. And Trump had responded by saying he was “thinking about actually flying over” – which would have to happen immediately on the heels of his big Gulf visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE. Zelensky has meanwhile insisted that any talks should be preceded by the start of a 30-day ceasefire – which Washington appears to be backing, but which the Kremlin has already rejected.

Really, all the talk of pushing to get Putin in Istanbul to negotiate in person was about generating mainstream media headlines like the following: Moscow worries that such a lengthy pause in fighting would only be used by Ukrainian forces to rearm and regroup along the front lines, at a moment they are exhausted and steadily losing ground. Peskov told reporters further, “[Western] Europe is, after all, entirely on Ukraine’s side. It cannot claim to have an unbiased approach… Its approach is not balanced, it is rather pro-war, aimed at continuing the fighting, which is in sharp contrast to the approach demonstrated, for example, by Moscow or Washington,” according to Russian media.

Read more …

Take out Zelensky -and the Europeans- and you can get a Putin-Trump meeting.

Trump’s Top Officials Going To Türkiye For Russia-Ukraine Talks – Reuters (RT)

US President Donald Trump is reportedly planning to send Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his senior envoys Steve Witkoff and Keith Kellogg to Türkiye this week to attend the potential talks between Moscow and Kiev, Reuters reported on Tuesday, citing anonymous sources. The talks, which are expected to be held in Istanbul on Thursday, were originally proposed last week by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who offered to resume direct negotiations between Moscow and Kiev without any preconditions in order to reach a lasting settlement to the Ukraine conflict. Vladimir Zelensky has expressed his readiness to engage in dialogue with the Russian side, but has insisted that it be preceded by an unconditional 30-day ceasefire – a demand Moscow has repeatedly rejected. Zelensky has also said that he would only attend the meeting in Istanbul if Putin comes in person.

Trump has also supported the proposal to renew talks between Moscow and Kiev. Speaking to reporters at the White House on Tuesday ahead of his Middle East tour, the US President stated that he might even personally attend the negotiations in Türkiye, especially if Putin decides to attend. “I was thinking about actually flying over there. There’s a possibility of it, I guess, if I think things can happen,” Trump said. “Don’t underestimate Thursday in Turkey,” he added. Moscow has not commented on the possibility of Putin traveling to Istanbul. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also has yet to confirm who would be representing Moscow during the talks, stating that the Russian president’s decision on the matter will be announced in due time.

According to Reuters, regardless of whether Putin, Zelensky or Trump decide to take part in the talks, Kellogg and Witkoff have been ordered to go to Istanbul on Thursday to attend the meeting. The outlet noted that the two senior advisers will not actually take direct part in the negotiations and will only play the role of observers. While it’s still unclear if the talks will actually take place and in what form, Peskov has stated that preparations for Thursday’s negotiations are underway. He has also ruled out the possibility of any of Kiev’s Western European backers taking part in the process, arguing that they are “entirely on Ukraine’s side” and “rather pro-war,” which excludes them from being considered “unbiased.”

Read more …

Oh, they’ll be ready. Just not to give in.

Russia Continues To Prepare For May 15 Talks in Istanbul – Kremlin (Sp.)

Russia continues to prepare for negotiations with Ukraine scheduled for May 15 in Istanbul, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday. “The Russian side continues to prepare for the talks, which are scheduled to take place on Thursday,” Peskov told reporters. The Kremlin will announce who will represent Russia at the Istanbul talks as soon as Russian President Vladimir Putin deems it necessary to announce this, the official added. Europe is entirely on Ukraine’s side and cannot claim a balanced approach in the negotiation process, Peskov added. “I suggest once again that you focus on the statement by Russian President Vladimir Putin. If we talk in general about Europe’s participation in such a key negotiating process, then since Europe is entirely on Ukraine’s side, it cannot claim an unbiased approach, a balanced approach,” Peskov told reporters when asked whether there is a place for European leaders at the negotiating table in Turkiye.

Europe’s approach to Ukraine is aimed at continuing the conflict and contrasts with the approach of Moscow and Washington, the official added. Russia does not accept biased conclusions made regarding the MH17 crash case, Kremlin spokesman said. On Monday, the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Council named Russia as responsible for the downing of flight MH17 in eastern Ukraine in 2014. The Dutch cabinet said that the issue of compensation will be considered in the near future. “Our position is well known. You know that Russia was not a country that took part in the investigation of this incident. Therefore, we do not accept any biased conclusions,” Peskov told reporters.

Read more …

“There is no deal without President Putin’s sign-off.”

Not Talking To Putin Illogical – Witkoff (RT)

Isolating Russian President Vladimir Putin is unlikely to help resolve the Ukraine conflict, senior US negotiator Steve Witkoff has said, calling the approach lacking in logic. Western nations have attempted to marginalize Moscow diplomatically since the escalation of the conflict in 2022, but Witkoff, speaking to Breitbart News last week, criticized that approach. He emphasized the necessity of including all major players in the dialogue. ”We need to talk to any stakeholders in this conflict,” Witkoff said in the section of the interview published Monday. “There is no deal without President Putin’s sign-off.” US President Donald Trump’s special envoy added that he found it difficult to “understand the logic” of those who oppose direct engagement with the Russian leader.

The Trump administration’s current stance is that Russian and Ukrainian officials must be brought together physically so that the US can “show them that the alternatives to a peaceful resolution here are bad for everybody.” The Trump administration’s current stance is that Russian and Ukrainian officials must be brought together physically so that the United States can “show them that the alternatives to a peaceful resolution here are bad for everybody.” Putin last week reiterated Moscow’s call to resume negotiations that Kiev abandoned in 2022, proposing that talks be held again in Istanbul. Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky and several European NATO members have insisted that Russia first agree to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, warning that failure to do so will result in further sanctions. Russian officials say such a pause would give Kiev an opportunity to regroup militarily and renew hostilities.

Putin has offered to restart negotiations as early as Thursday. Zelensky has said he will go to Istanbul that day and expects Putin to come too. Witkoff emphasized that the US could step back from its mediating role if progress is not made. “The president has issued an ultimatum to both sides” to begin direct talks, he said. ”I think if the US pulls back from this conflict… that’s a bad result for everybody,” he added. “It’s bad for the Europeans. It’s bad for the Ukrainians. I don’t think it’s good for the Russians. I think the Russians actually do want a peaceful settlement.” Moscow has urged a comprehensive agreement that addresses what it sees as the root causes of the conflict, including a promise by NATO to eventually admit Ukraine and discriminatory policies by Kiev toward ethnic Russians.

Read more …

Paul Craig Roberts posted this piece on the popular statues of obese black women. I guess I have the author and title right, but I can’t be sure.

How Our Country and Its History Were Stolen from Us (Donald Jeffries)

Recently, there has been a veritable epidemic of statues suddenly popping up all over the globe, depicting overweight Black females. This is decidedly odd, as the figures don’t represent a particular person of historical significance, but rather a modern “Woke” phenomenon of a brand of human being; the loud and proud Black woman.

[..] In New York City, there is now a twelve foot statue of an obese Black woman- sporting the distinctive hands on hip stance that has made them so beloved in America 2.0. The statue is nonsensically called “Grounded in the Stars.” As someone once said, if you want to gauge the health of a nation, look at its art. The statue provides a startling dose of “diversity,” in contrast to the statues of boring dead White guys Father Francis Duffy and songwriter George M. Cohan. This is the same New York City, of course, who over the past few years took down statues of Teddy Roosevelt and Thomas Jefferson. The message is; an anonymous Black woman is more culturally and historically significant to this country than the most brilliant of our Founding Fathers, who wrote the Declaration of Independence. If that isn’t a slap in the face to the millions who are still asleep, I don’t know what would be.

The first question that should be asked is; why this curious campaign to install statues of fictional Black women? Who started it? Who is behind it? I seriously doubt that leaders in Italy and the Netherlands abruptly determined, independent of each other, that homage should be paid to a demographic group that has zero historical ties to either country. Now, the motivation is obvious. To further promote Black people. Well, any Black people who aren’t questioning the disproportionate power of a certain ethnic/religious group, that is. And to further diminish the historical greatness of formerly hallowed White leaders. And what about the White women? Why doesn’t Pakistan erect a statue of a fictional girl in a bikini? You could have her staring at her cell phone if you want. Nonwhite countries need cultural “diversity,” too, don’t they? Where are the statues of antiwar icon Jeanette Rankin, our greatest historical figure who identified as female?

It’s hard to tell how many Black female statues there are. A few years back, there were reports of them springing up in Roanoke, Virginia, and South Boston. There were already at least six statues of Harriet Tubman scattered across this country. I doubt that there are six statues of White women collectively in America. The most featured female on U.S. statues is the Indian squaw (yeah, I know- that’s probably “hate speech”) Sacagawea, who has an impressive sixteen of them. I guess statues are kind of like presidential candidates; only nonwhite women need apply. And yet White women can’t stop applauding. They may well like fat Black statues even more than transgender athletes. Roanoke, Virginia, which featured Virginia Dare, the first child born in America, vanished without a trace. The city still exists, and despite being on the edge of nearly all-White Appalachia, its only two statues are of Black figures.

The statue of Robert E. Lee that stood in the U.S. Capitol was scheduled to be replaced by a 2021 decree, in favor of a sixteen year old girl named Barbara Johns, who led a student walkout in Prince Edward County in 1951. It was something to do with racism, which they tell us was all the rage back then. One thing you know for sure is that Johns was Black. Virginia has a statue of Mary Todd Lincoln’s Black dressmaker Elizabeth Keckly, but not of Honest Abe’s overly emotional wife. So this explosion of Black female statues is not really new. They were already overrepresented. As one typically absurd “Woke” spokesperson put it, this is an effort to “confront preconceived notions of identity and representation.” It’s inevitable that one or more statues of Black women with suitably fat asses will pop up somewhere, to memorialize the fine art of twerking. We would not want future generations to forget that.

This well organized campaign comes on the heels of laughable propaganda that “Black women built this country.” What? I can’t think of any group that had less to do with building this country. Well, maybe Hispanics. After all, they weren’t here then. The very term had yet to be invented. Or Muslims. No, it was almost exclusively White males who built this country, backed by hearty and supportive frontier wives, mothers, and daughters. But it’s “racist” to even say that. And on top of that, there is the even more head shaking “Shut up! A Black woman is speaking!” This ridiculous expression is parroted most enthusiastically by self-loathing White women. This kind of insidious programming goes well beyond conventional Stockholm Syndrome. White women are not literally being held captive by Black women. This is just one of the reasons why I maintain at least 1/3 of White women today are clinically insane.

If they expand their horizons, there are plenty of worthy flesh and blood candidates to consider. Queen Latifah is certainly fat enough, and at least has displayed her lack of acting skills in a good number of IMDB credits. Stacy Abrams? She lost an election and is still complaining about it. And I don’t have to tell you that they don’t come any obesier in the Black community than her. Oprah? Imagine how excited the White women would be! Their “girlfriend,” who manipulated them to high ratings, and then dropped their racial and sexual comrade Hillary like a hot potato when Barack Obama declared for the presidency. It would take some skill to get the majesty and scope of Oprah’s giant behind just right, kind of like the Venus de Milo from a dark universe. And if you want to be inclusive of non-obese Black women, there’s Kamala. Perhaps Jasmine Crockett. And Michelle Obama can represent….well, you know.

Read more …

He just can’t be elected.

Trump Can Still Lead Without a Third Term (Victor Davis Hanson)

You know, one of the most popular topics in the media is President Donald Trump is now a lame duck, even though he has basically a full term of four years. But if you read The Washington Post, even The Wall Street Journal, but especially The New York Times, the question is, can MAGA survive after Trump steps down? In other words, if I were to decode that, it was, “Please, please let’s end these crazy MAGA people because Trump won’t be around.” There’s arguments on both sides whether a popular movement can survive its creators. Obviously, the tea party from which MAGA drew a lot of its ideas as well as the candidacy of Ron Paul—the three candidacies, I should say—did not survive. Or it was incorporated or absorbed into MAGA. But it didn’t survive because it didn’t have a leader.

And when you look back at presidents of a party that have their own brand—Reaganism, for one example—they usually do not survive the tenure of the original president, even if the same party continues the administration. Ronald Reagan, he had a particular conservative strain of Republicanism that when he ran on two prior occasions, they said he wouldn’t be elected. He’s too conservative. Yet, when he stepped down, he proved that Reaganism was a very effective political ideology. And what happened? His handpicked successor, George H.W. Bush, almost as soon as he came into power, he said, “Read my lips. No new taxes.” And he raised taxes. And then you remember what he said? He said, “I want a kinder, gentler nation.” Nancy Reagan, the first former first lady, said, “Kinder and gentler than whom? Us?” So he didn’t really continue Reaganism.

Bill Clinton hit upon—I think partly with the input of Mark Penn, Dick Morris, Doug Schoen—a centrist Democratic way of government. Maybe it wasn’t as centrist as we think but it was pretty left-wing. But they were able to pass it off as centrist. It was a winning formula. Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 to succeed him. And what did Barack Obama do? He repudiated Clintonism and the Democratic Leadership Council. And he went hard to the Left. And the result of that is we got a destroyed or an irrelevant Democratic Party. So, when Trump steps down, there’s all of these arguments, pro and con, that MAGA will or will not survive. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is a very effective governor. He had a sweeping victory in 2022. He embraced the MAGA agenda. And his argument was, “You can have MAGA but without the Trump legal liabilities.” But he wasn’t able to capture the popular imagination.

I’ll leave you with one last thought. Donald Trump has been trolling the media. In March he said—they asked him, “Would you like a third term?” “Uh, no. You know, you can’t do it. But my lawyers are working on it. They’re looking at it.” What he meant was the 22nd Amendment that was passed in 1951, right before the ascension of Dwight Eisenhower—no president shall be elected for more than two terms. No president shall be elected twice. That was a Republican reaction. They controlled the Congress for two of the four terms of FDR. It’s kind of ironic because Dwight Eisenhower would’ve been elected a third time probably and beat John F. Kennedy if he could have run a third time. But his party had precluded that idea right before he became president.

A lot of presidents think about it. Every successful president, the topic comes up. It came up with Reagan. It came up with Clinton. Obama, remember, said, “I’d like to phone in a third term, if I didn’t have to do the work.” He also said he was lazy. He confessed to that. Maybe that was why. But here’s my point. Trump was not serious at the time. He just wanted to either troll the press and media or he wanted to dispel the idea that he was a lame duck and just throw it out there that maybe he could be president a third time. Because if you look at the language of the 22nd Amendment, it doesn’t say you can’t hold office twice. It says you can’t be elected. Perhaps he could get a vice president—he could run as vice president. The president could resign.

And then, he would take over and hold office three times but not be elected. That was all fantasy. He was never going to do that. No voter would vote for a president to step down. Here’s my point, again. Donald Trump was trolling and he knows what makes the Left angry and confuses. And the worst thing that they fear is a third term. But just this May—just recently he was asked that question again. He said, “Of course I’m not gonna run for a third term. And who’s going to be the standard-bearer? I don’t know. I don’t wanna pick them. But we have an obvious vice president who’s a firm believer in MAGA. And we have Marco Rubio, a successful secretary of state, who could also serve.”

But the point, again, is he raised the question, “Will this MAGA doctrine continue after I leave? Will there be sunshine after the sun is gone?” In other words, to use a simile. And he’s saying, “I’m gonna be around. I’m gonna be a senior statesman. I’m going to endorse somebody. And I’m gonna ensure that that person, by the force of my ex-presidency and influence, shall abide by MAGA doctrines.” So no, Donald Trump is not going to seek a third term. And yes, I think the MAGA ideology of the Republican Party will stay with us for the near future.

Read more …

“This is the global elite smart set’s version of the gangbanger who sticks up a business and later posts pictures of himself on social media holding the gun in front of all the stolen goods..”

Trump Administration Is Exposing the Hubris of Institutional DEI (Stepman)

Harvard University was likely in violation of civil rights law in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and the school practically said so, proudly, on its public website. Now it is under federal investigation. The Washington Free Beacon’s Aaron Sibarium reported Monday that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, a federal agency created to enforce civil rights law, launched an investigation into Harvard in late April over whether the school was (or continues to be) unlawfully hiring based on race and sex. It reportedly discovered this information based not on some deep investigation into the workings of the school, but from Harvard’s own public website.

“In public documents now deleted from Harvard’s website but still publicly available on web archives, Harvard admitted that in a span of ten years, it went from 59% of ‘all ladder faculty’ being white men to 49%, comparing that decrease in white men to an increase in the ‘total women, nonbinary, and faculty of color’ (i.e., all faculty other than white men) from 41% in 2013 to 51% in 2023,” the EEOC reported. It wasn’t just a case of apparent discrimination in its recent hiring practices, the EEOC claims. According to the report, “Harvard touted its success in changing its faculty demographics, noting in 2023 that its numbers of women and ‘people of color’ tenured was up 24% and 33% over ten years, with the percentage of each group tenured since 2022 (just one year) at 46%.” The report included a long list of potentially discriminatory student training programs too.

The EEOC noted that these practices didn’t come to an end in 2023. Again, why does it think this? Harvard straight up said so on its website. This is the global elite smart set’s version of the gangbanger who sticks up a business and later posts pictures of himself on social media holding the gun in front of all the stolen goods. Harvard has some ‘splainin’ to do. And it couldn’t come at a worse time as the Trump administration has not only put a hold on billions of dollars in federal grant money over civil rights violations but has even threatened to pull the university’s tax-exempt status. The Daily Signal reached out to Harvard for comment about the investigation. A spokesperson for the school pointed to a statement by Harvard President Alan Garber. “Employment at Harvard is similarly based on merit and achievement. We seek the best educators, researchers, and scholars at our schools,” Graber said.

“We do not have quotas, whether based on race or ethnicity or any other characteristic. We do not employ ideological litmus tests. We do not use diversity, equity, and inclusion statements in our hiring decisions.” What’s remarkable about this investigation is how unremarkable Harvard’s actions were. For the last decade at least, elite institutions of all kinds have been leaning into diversity, equity, and inclusion to the point of openly saying this is a key metric for hiring decisions. This trend only accelerated during the George Floyd riots and the Great Awokening. Besides a few outlets like The Daily Signal, there was relatively little criticism of this practice by the legacy media. The Biden administration seemed to outright encourage it as it engaged in its own, vast federal DEI initiatives and hiring practices.

Apparently, few institutions questioned whether this was strictly legal and assumed the federal government would always support discriminatory hiring in the name of racial justice. Even law firms were apparently unconcerned about the potential repercussions of DEI hiring. The EEOC on Monday, according to The Federalist, launched a complaint against nearly 50 of the country’s top law firms, accusing them of discriminating against white applicants to a summer fellowship program in the name of diversity. Again, this didn’t come from any kind of deep investigation. It came from a public website where Sponsors for Educational Opportunity bragged that it was “the nation’s only summer internship program for pre-law students of color.”

The Trump administration made it clear virtually from Day One that it considered these practices illegal and that the Justice Department would investigate “unlawful discrimination related to ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI) in the workplace.” That produced a counterrevolution overnight. Many businesses were quick to drop DEI the moment they thought it was safe to do so. The study that provided the foundation for most DEI hiring practices has already been soundly debunked. The advantage DEI gave businesses is that it kept well-funded left-wing activists and the federal government off their backs. Remove those fears and add to it the potential for lawsuits and it’s easy to see why Big Business has been quietly extinguishing DEI.

Big Business was quickest to bail out when it became clear the political winds were changing. That process became a stampede after President Donald Trump was elected as even the wokest companies have begun dropping DEI quotas after openly touting them for years. Higher education is a special case, especially the most elite universities. They don’t just embrace DEI as an ideology to stay on the good side of a regime. They are the originators of the idea, the home of the true believers who would rather find increasingly clever ways to discriminate rather than follow the law.

Read more …

Q: who does the EU use for such investigations? They have no secret service.

EU Investigating MEPs Over Moscow Visit – Lawmaker (RT)

A member of the European Parliament claims he and other lawmakers who recently traveled to Moscow are facing an EU investigation over their diplomatic outreach to Russia. Independent Cypriot MEP Fidias Panayiotou visited the Russian capital with other lawmakers during Victory Day celebrations, where he met with the chairman of the lower chamber of the Russian parliament, Vyacheslav Volodin. In a video posted to X on Monday, Panayiotou said his trip “was not liked at all in the European Parliament, and they have already started an investigation against us. ”Panayiotou has openly criticized the EU’s combative stance on Russia and the Ukraine conflict. He argues that Brussels should prioritize diplomacy over supplying weapons to Kiev.

During last Saturday’s meeting, Volodin lauded international dialogue that allows officials “understand each other and come up with decisions important for their peoples and states,” according to the State Duma’s website. Other guests at the Russian parliament reportedly came from Germany, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Serbia. The Moscow visit coincided with Russia’s Victory Day commemorations marking the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. The event drew 28 foreign leaders, including Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic – both of whom ignored threats from Brussels should they go.

“I consider today’s trip to Moscow to be extremely successful,” Fico said, noting he held talks with senior officials from Brazil, China, and other countries on the sidelines of the event.Vucic, speaking from Moscow’s Red Square, said he was proud to represent Serbia – an EU candidate – at the ceremony, even though he expected to face personal consequences from the EU for his attendance. Russian President Vladimir Putin praised visiting foreign leaders who attended Victory Day celebrations, calling them “leaders not through their office, but through strength of character, convictions, and readiness to defend those convictions.”

Read more …

“Trump also proclaimed that he ordered the cessation of US-Houthi hostilities in the Red Sea, after the Pentagon flexed its military might.”

There are different versions of that story. Some call it a humiliation.

Trump Torches Neocons, Emphasizes ‘Peace Through Strength’ Deal-Making (ZH)

Some highlights of President Trump’s lengthy speech before the US-Saudi Investment Forum, wherein he frequently praised his Saudi host crown prince Mohammad bin Salman and advanced peace through deal-making…

Markets Rocking The stock market is “gonna go a lot higher.” He said “People should have listened. We’ve never had anything like this,” and he cited the “explosion of investment and jobs.” Business executives “weren’t that happy when they saw me,” a month ago, but changed their tune as markets rose,” Trump added. “We are rocking: The United States is the hottest country, with the exception of your country,” Trump said, pointing to MbS in the front row before him.

Saudi Arabia as Global Business/Tech Hub “Mohammed do you sleep at night? How do you sleep?” he said, addressing the crown prince. “Critics doubted it was possible, what you’ve done, but over the past eight years, Saudi Arabia has proved the critics totally wrong.” “…Instead, the birth of a modern Middle East has been brought by the people of the region themselves, the people that are right here, the people that have lived here all their lives, developing your own sovereign countries, pursuing your own unique visions and charting your own destinies in your own way.”

Silence befell the crowd as Trump said that it was his “fervent wish” that Saudi Arabia “will soon be joining the Abraham Accords” – but he ultimately conceded that the kingdom will do it in “it’s own time”. “It will be a special day in the Middle East, with the whole world watching, when Saudi Arabia joins us. And you’ll be greatly honoring me, and you’ll be greatly honoring all of those people that have fought so hard for the Middle East. And I really think it’s going to be something special — but you’ll do it in your own time. And that’s what I want, and that’s what you want, and that’s the way it’s going to be.”

Iran put on Notice “In the case of Iran, I have never believed in having permanent enemies. I am different than a lot of people think. I don’t like permanent enemies. Sometimes you need enemies to do the job, and you have to do it right. Enemies get you motivated,” Trump said. He continued, “I want to make a deal with Iran. I can make a deal with Iran. I’ll be very happy if we’re going to make your region and the world a safer place.” He offered a “much brighter future” if Tehran will do a deal. “If Iran’s leadership rejects this olive branch and continues to attack their neighbors, then we will have no choice but to inflict massive, maximum pressure … and take all action required to stop the regime from ever having a nuclear weapon. Iran will never have a nuclear weapon,” he said.

Lifting Sanctions on Syria “Syria, they’ve had their share of travesty, war, killing in many years. That’s why my administration has already taken the first steps toward restoring normal relations between the United States and Syria for the first time in more than a decade,” Trump said. “The sanctions were brutal and crippling and served as an important — really an important function — nevertheless, at the time. But now it’s their time to shine,” he added. So I say, ‘Good luck, Syria.’ Show us something very special.” “Oh what I do for the crown prince,” Trump said [..]

Blasted NeoCons & Liberal Interventionists “In the end, the so-called ‘nation-builders’ wrecked far more nations than they built—and the interventionists were intervening in complex societies they did not understand,” Trump said. “The gleaming marvels of Riyadh and Abu Dhabi were not created by the so-called nation-builders, neo-cons, or liberal non-profits like those who spent trillions failing to develop Kabul and Baghdad.” “In Syria, which has seen so much misery and death, there is a new government that we must all hope will succeed in stabilizing the country and keeping peace.”

Gaza, Yemen “The people of Gaza deserve a much better future,” Trump said. “But that will or cannot occur as long as their leaders choose to kidnap, torture and target innocent men, women and children for political ends.” Trump also proclaimed that he ordered the cessation of US-Houthi hostilities in the Red Sea, after the Pentagon flexed its military might.

Read more …

Bibi watches Trump in Riyadh and it makes him nervous.

BTW: I read Edan Alexander refused to meet with Netanyahu, but I see no details.

Netanyahu Blasts Media ‘Spin’, Says Trump Ties ‘Excellent’ (Cradle)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced on Monday that he has approved a negotiating delegation to travel to Qatar on Tuesday to participate in US-led prisoner exchange talks. The decision was announced after the embattled premier met with US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Ambassador Mike Huckabee earlier in the day and spoke over the phone with US President Donald Trump. “I thanked President Trump for his assistance in the release of IDF soldier Edan Alexander. President Trump, for his part, reiterated his commitment to Israel and his desire to continue close cooperation with me,” Netanyahu wrote on social media.

“In my meeting with Envoy Witkoff and Ambassador Huckabee, we discussed the last-ditch effort to implement the outline for the release of the hostages presented by Witkoff, before the fighting escalates. To this end, I have instructed that a negotiating delegation be sent to Doha tomorrow,” Netanyahu added. He also said he had informed his US allies “that negotiations would only take place under fire.” Netanyahu’s announcement came a few hours after he rejected reports that a rift exists between him and Trump, calling his relationship with the US president “excellent.” “These spins – most of them are born here [in Israel.] They’re born in a certain media outlet that’s trying to promote a certain candidate. And in order to promote him, they need to say: ‘Trump and Netanyahu are no longer,'” Netanyahu said in a video posted on his X account.

https://twitter.com/IhabHassane/status/1922014395682488515?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1922014395682488515%7Ctwgr%5E60727b8b582f72661326eb65488d00e38dbab088%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fgeopolitical%2Fnetanyahu-blasts-media-spin-says-trump-ties-excellent-dispatches-hostage-negotiators

This comes as Israeli-US captive Edan Alexander was released by Hamas on Monday evening. Officials from Washington reportedly informed Tel Aviv that his release will kickstart a new round of prisoner exchange talks. Alexander’s release reportedly prompted a partial stop in Israeli army operations inside Gaza. “A significant number of military operations have indeed been halted. There are no airstrikes in Gaza, aside from a few attacks, and no drone reconnaissance flights over the Gaza Strip,” Israeli Army Radio had reported Monday morning.

Read more …

Set for Thursday. Not a done deal.

Supreme Court Set to End Era of Nationwide Judicial Injunctions (Margolis)

The days of rogue district court judges hijacking executive authority may finally be numbered. On Thursday, the Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in a consolidated case, Trump v. CASA, which challenges lower court rulings that blocked President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. Despite the constitutional authority granted to the executive branch on immigration matters, three district judges issued sweeping nationwide injunctions halting the order. Now, the highest court may have the chance to rein in judicial overreach and restore balance between the branches of government. Since President Trump began his second term, liberal judges have weaponized nationwide injunctions against his administration an astonishing 17 times in just the first few months — and that’s only counting through late March 2025. This is nothing new, of course.

Even Newsweek seems to believe that the court will side with the Trump administration. “In recent years, some justices have expressed criticism of universal injunctions. Justice Neil Gorsuch, one of the court’s conservatives, argued in a 2020 concurring opinion that injunctions are “meant to redress the injuries sustained by a particular plaintiff in a particular lawsuit.” He said the “routine issuance of universal injunctions is patently unworkable, sowing chaos for litigants, the government, courts, and all those affected by these conflicting decisions” and that the court must address them. He also noted that nationwide injunctions mean that plaintiffs can shop around for the judge that is most likely to be sympathetic to their cause.”

“Because plaintiffs generally are not bound by adverse decisions in cases to which they were not a party, there is a nearly boundless opportunity to shop for a friendly forum to secure a win nationwide,” Gorsuch wrote. Even Justice Elena Kagan, one of the Court’s three liberal justices, has criticized broad nationwide injunctions and the blatant judge-shopping tactics used by plaintiffs to game the system.This shouldn’t be a partisan issue because Joe Biden’s outgoing Solicitor General, Elizabeth Prelogar, also filed a brief in December 2024 asking the Supreme Court to limit these broad orders despite knowing Trump would benefit from the decision. “In the Trump years, people used to go to the Northern District of California, and in the Biden years, they go to Texas,” Kagan said in 2022. “It just can’t be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process.”

Let’s be honest: Nationwide injunctions were never about judicial oversight. They’ve been the left’s go-to tool for blocking President Trump’s agenda through activist judges. With just one ruling, any of the hundreds of district court judges in the country can nullify federal policy they don’t like. Now, the left is panicking. Without these judicial shortcuts, they’ll have to argue their cases on the merits instead of in front of cherry-picked friendly judges. Even Vox admitted these injunctions were “the core of the resistance.” But that era may be ending. The Supreme Court looks poised to rein in this abuse of power and restore constitutional balance. For anyone who believes in law, not lawfare, this moment can’t come soon enough.

Read more …

“Qatar is offering the jet to the US military, not Donald Trump..”

Here’s the Truth About the Qatar Jumbo Jet Story (Margolis)

The Democrats have been desperate to find a scandal to pin on Trump, and their latest attempt may be the stupidest yet.It was recently reported that the Trump administration is gearing up to accept a high-end Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the Qatari royal family—a luxury aircraft that will serve as a temporary Air Force One during President Trump’s second term. Naturally, the left is already losing its mind, but here’s the reality: this is a win for taxpayers. In the wake of media hysteria over the offer from Qatar to provide the United States with an aircraft, Buzz Patterson, a retired Air Force pilot, White House military aide, and carrier of the nuclear football, has stepped in to inject a dose of reality—and firsthand experience—into the conversation. While critics scramble to paint the move as some kind of scandal involving President Trump, Patterson makes clear this is nothing new or scandalous, and absolutely nothing that warrants the breathless outrage.

“I’m going to try one last time,” Patterson began in a post on X. “The Qatar B-747 was built in the US by Boeing. They are offering a newer 747 to replace one of the two current AF-1s that have been flying for 40 years. Which are tired and need to be replaced.”That last point is key. The current Air Force One planes are aging relics that first entered service when Ronald Reagan was in the White House. Replacing them has been a long, slow, and—thanks to bureaucratic delays—frustrating process. Patterson, who served as a military aide during the Clinton administration and has flown on Air Force One over a hundred times, says the Qatar aircraft would simply help fill the gap until Boeing completes new replacements—something that won’t happen for years.

“This AF-1 will serve the sitting president, whether they be Republican or Democrat until Boeing gets their s—t together to complete the new, upcoming improved 747s that started under Obama, was renegotiated under Trump, and was completely ignored by the Biden administration,” he explained. “It’s looking like 2029 to 2030 for delivery at the soonest.” Critics have tried to turn this into a personal gift to Trump, but that’s not even remotely accurate. “Qatar is offering the jet to the US military, not Donald Trump,” Patterson explained. And the idea that this somehow jeopardizes national security is also off base. “They will get the aircraft and perform all of the security and the installation of the systems that AF-1 requires to safely move our president around the world. Not the Qatari’s,” Patterson explained. “And you and I will pay for that but not the $400 million the 747 would normally cost.”

In other words, the U.S. is saving money and getting a newer, U.S.-made aircraft to bridge the gap until Boeing finally delivers the long-overdue replacements. And contrary to the media’s alarmist tone, this sort of arrangement isn’t unprecedented. “The wing based at Andrews has also purchased aircraft from other countries in the past which are currently flying our VP and senior government officials. This is NOT new,” Patterson said. As for the predictable online conspiracies? Patterson dismissed them with a knowing smirk. “I love X but sometimes the ‘sky is falling’ conspiracy crap grows tiresome. A little knowledge goes a long way. Having flown on the current AF-1s 100 hundred [sic] times, I have intimate knowledge.” In short, the critics are wrong, the facts are clear, and the manufactured outrage is little more than partisan noise drowning out a perfectly rational, cost-saving move for the country.

Read more …

“It’s like that moment in Orwell’s Animal Farm when the animals looked from man to pig and pig to man and they could no longer tell the difference..”

Labour and Tories are ‘Two Cheeks of the Same Backside’ – George Galloway (Sp.)

Imagine that for a second — freezing your own pensioners while funding someone else’s war. This is the UK’s reality now, and no one from either of the two major British political parties is speaking up against this. “The Labour minister’s talk is indistinguishable from the Conservative ministers’ talk. It’s like that moment in Orwell’s Animal Farm when the animals looked from man to pig and pig to man and they could no longer tell the difference,” the former British parliamentarian George Galloway told Sputnik.

Read more …

“Reform UK’s rise isn’t just a warning shot; it’s a referendum on Labour’s betrayal of the working class..”

Isn’t it treason to let your country be overrun?

UK PM Starmer Mercilessly Dragged For Telling Immigrants To Speak English (MN)

In a jaw-dropping display of political hypocrisy, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer declared Monday that it is “common sense” that migrants should speak English, posting on X that “If you want to live in the UK, you should speak English.” This from the same Labour leader whose government has overseen the harassment and even arrest of Brits for expressing similar sentiments, branded as potential “hate crimes” under draconian speech laws.

While ordinary citizens face police scrutiny for daring to question unchecked immigration or cultural integration, Starmer now parrots the very rhetoric he once condemned, revealing a spineless opportunism that prioritizes political survival over principle. The irony is thicker than London fog: the man who championed open borders and vilified Brexit voters as xenophobes now postures as a defender of national cohesion, all while his Home Office fails to stem the tide of illegal Channel crossings.

This brazen pivot comes as no surprise given the political earthquake shaking Starmer’s Labour Party. The recent local elections saw Nigel Farage’s Reform UK surge, capturing councils and seats with a platform unapologetically slamming mass immigration and woke orthodoxy. Reform’s gains, including a stunning Runcorn byelection upset, have sent Labour into a tailspin, with Starmer’s approval ratings tanking as voters flee to Farage’s turquoise tidal wave.

Polls show Reform’s favourability spiking, particularly among working-class Britons fed up with Labour’s elitist disconnect. Starmer’s sudden tough talk on immigration—complete with promises to slash net migration and impose stricter English language rules—smacks of a desperate bid to claw back voters defecting to Reform. But his words ring hollow, a cynical rebrand from a man who, as shadow Brexit secretary, campaigned for a second EU referendum and scoffed at concerns about immigration’s impact on communities.

The stench of Starmer’s double standards is suffocating. While he now preaches “integration” and “fair rules,” his government continues to coddle a system where dissenters are silenced and borders remain porous. Brits who’ve lost jobs, homes, or safety to the strains of mass migration watch as Starmer plays both sides—cracking down on free speech while failing to deport illegals. Reform UK’s rise isn’t just a warning shot; it’s a referendum on Labour’s betrayal of the working class.Starmer’s English language edict isn’t common sense—it’s a calculated flip-flop from a man terrified of Farage’s shadow, and it won’t fool a public fed up with two-faced elites.

Read more …

“Germany often relies on external partners to spy on its own citizens, as Germany features very strict privacy laws. The NSA is thought to be especially active watching Germans.”

US Pressure May Have Forced Germany To Drop Surveillance On AfD (RMX)

Germany’s domestic spy agency has suspended authoritarian surveillance methods of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, and U.S. pressure may have played a role. The German Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), the country’s powerful domestic spy agency, had labeled the AfD a “confirmed far-right organization” before suspending this designation last week. The main reason presented was that the AfD is appealing the designation in court and the agency would wait until this appeal is concluded to decide whether to keep the designation. However, Germany’s ally, the United States, immediately criticized the designation in some of the harshest language possible, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio calling it “tyranny in disguise.” That was not all, though.

U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the powerful U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee, then asked Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard (DNI) to suspend intelligence cooperation between the United States and Germany. According to Cotton, the German authorities’ politically motivated surveillance activities resemble methods used by dictatorships that are unbecoming of a democratic ally. “Rather than trying to undermine the AfD using the tools of authoritarian states, Germany’s incoming government might be better advised to consider why the AfD continues to gain electoral ground,” he wrote. This would have represented a drastic break between the two allies and even a threat to Germany’s national security, which raised the stakes in Germany’s authoritarian move to stifle the political opposition. Currently, the AfD is the largest opposition party in the country and for the first time ever, polled in first place last month.

The developments have also caused a major stir in Germany. Alice Weidel, co-chair of the AfD, said American pressure was behind the BfV’s withdrawal of its designation label on the AfD. In addition, Joachim Steinhöfel, a lawyer defending freedom of speech, told NIUS that the move by the BfV is “a complete surrender by the German domestic intelligence service.” He also noted that U.S. influence was vital. “We also have to thank the Americans for exerting massive pressure,” he added. Germany often relies on external partners to spy on its own citizens, as Germany features very strict privacy laws. The NSA is thought to be especially active watching Germans. As a result, any U.S. withdrawal from intelligence sharing could have been disastrous for Germany.

The temporary removal of the designation was warmly welcomed by the AfD, as it gives the party breathing room. For one, a vote on the ban of the party has little chance of moving forward without the designation. Second, the designation offered the BfV the legal means to surveil the entire party and its membership without a warrant, including reading emails and chats, as well as flood the party with informants. Now, German intelligence is being forced to rethink its surveillance policy as political divisions grow. However, if the appeal court agrees with the BfV that the AfD can be labeled right-wing extremist, the same issue may rear its head again. It is unclear how long this appeals process will take, whether months or even years; however, there is a growing chorus from Germany’s left, as well as the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), to ban the entire AfD party. If that happens, tensions between the U.S. and Germany could soar to new heights.

Read more …

“This led to a wave of commercial spinoffs.”

Donald Trump Helped Ancient Russians Defeat Space Lizards (RT)

Heroic Slavic warriors triumph over evil reptilian invaders to pounding phonk beats. These surreal showdowns have racked up millions of views and spawned a wave of spin-offs, including video games, comic books, and tabletop RPGs. What started as a mock academic lecture quickly turned into a full-blown cultural phenomenon – fueled in part by some deep-rooted medieval nostalgia. One of the most well-known stories in the Ancient Rus vs. Lizards mythos is ‘The tale of how the Russian hero Danila Trumpov drove the accursed Lizards from the Slavic States of America’. In this fictional legend, a Russian version of Donald Trump defeats a shadowy alliance of humanoid lizards, who are supposedly aided by Bill Gates. Trumpov wields imaginative techniques like the “Republican Egg Squeeze” and the “Texas Burger Bomb,” and even manages to sabotage the lizard lobbyists by replacing the dollar with the ruble.

In the end, the forces of Slavic justice prevail, and the Lizards are forced to retreat to the distant planet of Nibiru. This is just one installment in a sprawling fan-fiction universe created as a joke, but which has grown far beyond its origins. What began as light-hearted parody has developed into a full-fledged narrative world that mixes satire, absurdity, and pseudo-history – while also poking fun at the cult of Russia’s supposed ancient supremacy. In March 2023, a strange YouTube video appeared, starring an AI-generated character introduced as “Professor and four-time historian Alexey Sergeyevich Bagirov.” Speaking with an air of authority, the professor unveiled what he described as the long-suppressed truth of Russian history: that the ancient Rus civilization once stretched across nearly the entire Earth.

Bagirov’s lecture combined several familiar conspiracy tropes – claims of lost civilizations with advanced technology, an ancient war between humans and shape-shifting lizards, divine interventions by pagan gods, and secret documents allegedly hidden from the public. His arguments leaned heavily on loose word associations and “secret documents,” while the visuals featured intentionally janky PowerPoint slides with exaggerated animations, accompanied by loud, distorted background music. But the creators went further than simply remixing old conspiracies. They built a whole new mythological framework. According to Bagirov, the ancient Rus not only coexisted with dinosaurs – they were actually friends. He explains that the word dinosaur supposedly derives from the Old Slavic root dino, meaning “child,” and that the name of the Slavic pagan god Zavra identifies him as the “divine ancestor” of all dinosaurs.

In a follow-up video, Bagirov adds a central stylistic twist to the saga: the Slavic reinterpretation of all names and terms. He describes how dinosaurs played an important role in the daily lives of the Rus. Brachiosaurus Brachislav helped build houses and studied astronomy; Styracosaurus Stavrislav took part in mammoth hunts; and a pterodactyl named Pterodimir flew children to school. In the third video, Bagirov introduces the main villains: the Lizards from the planet Nibiru – an idea familiar to fans of post-Soviet conspiracy lore. In this universe, the Lizards are jealous of the glory of the Rus and want to destroy it. Their weapon is deception: they try to seduce the Rus with fake sciences – especially mathematics. To that end, they dispatch agents such as Euclid, Archimedes, Democritus, Plato, and others, each programmed with 2G radiation, to infiltrate the ancient region of Russo-Greece.

Through all this, Bagirov satirizes the genre of amateur pseudo-historians who emerged in the post-Soviet space – those who claim access to secret truths, reject mainstream science, and lean heavily on unverifiable legends or misreadings of historical texts. These theorists rarely seek real evidence, but often captivate audiences with promises of lost national grandeur and sinister enemies. Though clearly absurd, the videos resonated with viewers. The fictional characters were so outrageous, and the tone so deliberately ridiculous, that the series became far more popular than anyone had expected – perhaps even more than the creators intended.

The characters of the Rus and the Lizards soon found a second life in short-form video content. These clips featured AI-generated visuals, voiceovers in mock-serious tones, and of course, pounding phonk soundtracks. The volume of content rapidly multiplied, and the Rus vs. Lizards universe continued to evolve, layering in more absurdist and satirical details. In these stories, the source of the Rus’ supernatural vitality is the water of Lake Baikal – an intentional nod to the lake’s revered status in Russian culture and to pseudo-scientific beliefs about the mystical power of “charged water.” The Rus are portrayed as a global civilization, and this is reflected in the fictional renaming of countries: Australorussia, Egyptoslavia, the Slavic States of America, and more. These names parody pseudo-historians who try to rewrite history to suggest that Russia once ruled the entire planet.

Religion in the Ancient Rus universe is a hybrid of Orthodox Christianity and revived paganism. On the one hand, characters shout catchphrases like “You fiends, at least fear the Lord!”; on the other, they perform bizarre rituals to Perun and other old Slavic deities. This mashup reflects the worldview of certain fringe groups who, in recent decades, attempted to revive pre-Christian Slavic faiths – often blending them with nationalist ideology and pseudoscience. Aside from the irony and satire, the meme’s success was also driven by how visually compelling the characters were. They looked cool. Their armor, weapons, and over-the-top powers appealed to a younger audience, especially in meme format. This led to a wave of commercial spinoffs.

Read more …

 

 

 

 

AI Theft
https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1922091193439228017

Musk
https://twitter.com/teslaownersSV/status/1921957388762112467

Musk

Makary

Giraffe

Duck pool
https://twitter.com/buitengebieden/status/1922276219703181770

 

 

 

 

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